- Conference Slides
- [ir13] #oo activism: uses of Twitter within the Occupy Oakland movement
- [ecc12] Political networks on Twitter: Tweeting the Queensland state election
- [ecc12] Tweeting le Tour: Connecting the Tour de France’s global audience through Twitter
- [ir13] #auspol, #qldpol, and #wapol: Twitter and the new Australian political commentariat
- [ir13] #eurovision: Twitter as a technology of fandom
- [ir13] Sharing the News: dissemination of links to Australian news sites on Twitter
- [georabble 6/big data week] Big Data + Twitter
- [del2013] Twitter and Australian political debates
- [anzca2013] #wavotes: Tracking candidates’ use of social media in the 2013 Western Australian state election
- [ir14] news via Voldemort: the role of parody and satire in topical discussions on Twitter
- [ir14] appropriating breaking news? the evolving Twitter coverage of the Lance Armstrong doping scandal
- [ir14] #ausvotes mark two: Twitter in the 2013 Australian federal election
- [compdata13] mapping movements: social movement research and big data: critiques and alternatives
In mid-July, in my final stop in the mid-year conference tour, I had the honour of presenting at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image (ACMI) in Melbourne at a symposium marking the opening of the David Bowie is exhibition in Australia at the same venue. Needless to say, it was an amazing experience, and huge thanks go to the organizers for their hard work in putting this together; I fell sick after the first day, unfortunately, and missed out on a whole bunch of fascinating work if the first day was anything to go by! Plus it’s not many conferences where the day starts with musical performances (including a ukulele trio dubbed the ‘Thin White Ukes’), features keynotes from a scholar living as Bowie, the David Bowie is V&A curator, and one of Australia’s pre-eminent musicians and music writers, *and* offers workshops and such that include make-up and photoshoots:
I presented a paper about David Bowie GIFs, fandom, and related themes; unlike many of my previous presentations, my slides were mostly images, projected onto a ridiculously huge cinema screen – so putting up the slides without comment seems a little confusing; however, also unusually, I wrote out a script for my presentation so that I had something to work from without the slides to give written prompts. So, if you are interested, you can find the full selection of GIFs and accompanying ‘script’ (which I talked around and occasionally went on short tangents from, but as a guide to what I was probably planning to say) after the cut:
A quick round-up of the slides for my various presentations from May and July at ICA in Puerto Rico and ANZCA in New Zealand: if you wanted to know what was on the slides (no audio) for presentations about, variously, birth and death as depicted on Instagram, Eurovision, Democracy Sausage, the Australian spatial imaginary and social media, visual social media and methodological challenges, and news and Twitter, then read on! These papers were variously prepared with Tama Leaver, Axel Bruns, Peta Mitchell, and Elizabeth Ellison.
ICA Mobile Preconference (San Juan, Puerto Rico: May 2015)
Tama Leaver and Tim Highfield: ‘Instagramming the ends of identity’
(ed: obviously, with 15 minutes to present not all 45 slides were talked about in the presentation itself!)
ICA (San Juan, Puerto Rico: May 2015)
Tim Highfield: ‘Depicting social television on Instagram’
Axel Bruns and Tim Highfield: ‘Social media news audiences and the quantified journalist’
ANZCA (Queenstown, New Zealand: July 2015)
Tim Highfield: ‘Bangers and mash-ups’
Peta Mitchell, Tim Highfield, and Elizabeth Ellison: ‘Mapping the Australian spatial imaginary via social media’
Tim Highfield and Tama Leaver: ‘Visual social media and digital methods’ (an updated version of the paper presented at ‘Digging the Data’ in Sydney in April 2015).
My conference schedule for the year is starting to come together, and over the next six months I’ll be involved in presentations on different sides of the planet, covering a pretty interesting range of topics with some brilliant collaborators – from Bowie to birth, #democracysausage to death, GIFs and loops to Eurovision and elections, and a generous dash of methods. This year’s tour (for no reason given the moniker the ‘Make Me Dance, I Want To Surrender‘ World Tour 2015) has several legs, and more dates may follow – especially in September and October. Check the upcoming page for the latest details!
Part one: April – May 2015
First up, at the end of this week I’m presenting at ‘Digging the Data’, an ANZCA pre-conference at the University of Sydney, on ‘Visual social media: Instagrammatics and beyond’ (17 April 2015). This is an updated version of both the Instagrammatics Tama Leaver and I have been working on, and some preliminary work for my VCRF project.
Then, at the start of May, in Brisbane (for once!), I’m the support act for Lee Humphreys at that month’s Digital Media seminar series at QUT – the topic for my talk is still TBA, but will probably be around ‘Visual Cultures of Social Media’ (8 May 2015).
A few weeks later, I’m off to Puerto Rico for the International Communication Association (ICA) conference in San Juan:
– at the ICA Mobile Preconference, Tama and I have a paper on ‘Instagramming the ends of identity‘, an overview of the Instagram elements we’ve been working on for Tama’s Ends of Identity project. (20 May 2015).
– in the full conference, Axel Bruns and I have a paper on ‘Social media news audiences and the quantified journalist’ as part of a panel on ‘the audience turn in journalism (studies)’. (22 May 2015).
– and also at the full conference, I’m presenting on ‘Depicting social television on Instagram: Visual social media, participation, and audience experiences of #sbseurovision’ – my paper about Australian Eurovision fandom on Instagram, to be presented a matter of hours before Australia competes at Eurovision for the very first time. (23 May 2015).
Part two: July 2015
In July, I’m off to New Zealand (for the first time!) to present at the Australia New Zealand Communication Association conference in Queenstown:
– first, I’m finally getting #democracysausage out of my system (8-10 July 2015)
– Peta Mitchell, Elizabeth Ellison, and I have a paper on ‘Social media and the Australian spatial imaginary‘, bringing together Peta’s work on cultural geography and social media mapping, Liz’s research into representations of place, and my digital media research, especially Instagram (8-10 July 2015).
– and Tama and I have the expanded version of ‘Visual social media: Instagrammatics and beyond’ as part of a Digital Methods panel (8-10 July 2015).
The following week, I’m off to Melbourne to give a talk at a symposium attached to the David Bowie Is… exhibition which is finally coming to Australia. My presentation is about fandom and visual culture on social media: it’s ‘Oh! You Pretty GIFs: Visualising David Bowie fandom on Tumblr’, to be given at The Stardom and Celebrity of David Bowie symposium, (17-18 July 2015).
Part three: September – October 2015
The early parts of this leg are still to be determined, but the tour will end up in Phoenix, Arizona, for the Association of Internet Researchers annual conference (IR16), where the following will happen:
– Stefanie Duguay and I will present on looping visual media, focusing on GIFs and Vines, in ‘“Like a monkey with a miniature cymbal”: Cultural practices of repetition in visual social media’ (21-24 October 2015).
– Tama and I will delve deeper into the visual representations of birth and death on Instagram in ‘Imagining the ends of identity: Birth and death on Instagram’ (21-24 October 2015)
– and Axel and I sum up six years of research into social media and Australian politics as part of a panel on elections in ‘Social Media in Selected Australian Federal and State Election Campaigns, 2010-15‘ (21-24 October 2015)
There is more to be announced, too – including more methods workshops, so keep an eye out for that! So, a pretty quiet year planned…
Fresh off the online-first version of the press, I have a journal article out with New Media & Society: ‘News via Voldemort: Parody accounts in topical discussions on Twitter’. The print version will come out at some point in the future, so final bibliographic information will be added later, but for now you can access the article at the NM&S site.
This paper is the full version of early research I presented in October 2013 at IR14 – the slides for which are here. I am really excited about this finished article, for a few reasons: to explain more, I’ve tried something different (and, full disclosure, overly-honest again (warning: TMI ahead)). I’ve prepared a recording which, in addition to including the audio from the original conference presentation, also provides a little bit of background and explanation for this research (and especially its significance for me at this point). If you’re interested in checking out this bonus material, you can listen here (or right/ctrl+click to download):
As for the publication itself, the full article is here, and here’s the abstract:
Parody accounts are prevalent on Twitter, offering irreverent interpretations of public figures, fictional characters and more. These accounts post comments framed within the context of their fictional universes or stereotypes of their subjects, responding in-character to topical events. This article positions parody accounts as a ritualised social media practice, an extension of fan practices and irreverent Internet culture. By providing a typology of parody accounts and analysing the topicality of selected parody accounts’ tweets, the research examines how these accounts contribute to topical discussions. In-character framing of topical comments allows parody accounts to offer original interpretations of breaking news that receive more attention than their other tweets. The presence and longevity of parody accounts underline the importance of humour on social media, including within news and topical coverage.
Highfield, T. (2015). News via Voldemort: Parody accounts in topical discussions on Twitter. New Media & Society (online first). doi: 10.1177/1461444815576703
Thanks again to everyone who gave feedback and suggestions on this paper as it developed over the last while, from the IR14 submission reviews to the conference audience to the journal reviewers. If you’d like to ask anything about this research – or can’t access the article through your institution &c., feel free to get in touch!
After a lull mid-2014, I’ve been writing a lot over the last few months; first articles and conference submissions, shorter pieces to get me back into the habit and build up momentum, and now the concerted effort for the book. I set myself an impractical aim for a full draft, which I’m fine with missing because doing what I could to make it has meant that I am still ahead of schedule overall.
It’s taken a lot of work to get to this point, though, since, as with many people, writing has not always been something that comes easily – to be honest, I think a big trick was realizing that it was perfectly okay to accept that some days words just won’t come, and to take advantage of the ones where they do rather than trying to force it. (Of course, this only really works if you’re not trying to write a paper at the last minute).
In the interests of overly-honest academia, then, here are three approaches I have found to be somewhat successful in terms of either getting words to appear on the page/screen (and this is no measure of quality of words), and actually getting motivation for work. There are of course additional factors that can help/hinder; I’m doing a lot of work in cafés at the moment, where usually I have no internet access and I can sit outside/in air-con and go into a bubble while the world goes by. And drink lots of coffee… Last summer I got a lot of work done at home, though, so location is a variable factor (and another point to underline is that what works now might not work in the future). The three confessions that follow, though, have stuck with me for longer than most:
1. writing with no filter
This has been the big one these last few months. Sometimes, there are silly things I want to write, puns to work around, dumb references to make; when I was in high school, those would be dominant features of my work, and then I realized maybe that wasn’t what I should be focusing on in terms of making an actual argument and having some analysis rather than showing how clever I thought I was. While my writing has improved since then, the tendency to be a bit irreverent remains, and over the last while I’ve embraced that again – not for putting in the finished product of my work, but more as a mechanism to get the writing started and to keep it flowing. Just writing what comes into my head about a topic, having strange turns of phrase, and including (and justifying) references to pretty much anything pop culture-related, have all helped to keep me writing on consecutive days – I’m usually someone who writes in a frenzied flurry at the last minute, rather than patiently building up a piece day-by-day, so aiming for 1000+ words per day without necessarily finishing anything, and hitting that target, is quite different, and, funnily enough, satisfying (I don’t write in a linear fashion, but bits and pieces all over the place that eventually get joined up).
Of course, there will be plenty of editing to come later, since I probably won’t (or shouldn’t) get away with much of the silliness; but it does mean the foundations are there for edits, so that they can be improved and made far stronger and on topic later on. (Another advantage of not doing things at the last minute: actual editing time beyond trying to ruthlessly cut too many words to get under the maximum word limit).
2. becoming more like Dennis Denuto
The #nofilter approach is an extension of an earlier trick I learned when writing my thesis became a bit of a hassle. Then, the blank page, and especially the fear of not knowing enough about a topic to write about it (for other people to read and critique) was a major hurdle to writing. Even when breaking it into sections and sub-sections, working in chunks, there were plenty of points with a general lack of confidence in what was going to come next (regardless of how much reading/analysis has been done previously). Mixed with other academic anxieties, for instance the imposter/fraud unease, then the pressure on the writing to be a clear, considered, and amazing demonstration of ideas and knowledge becomes even more pronounced.
So, when I was doing my PhD, one of the best pieces of advice from my supervisors when my struggles started to become a concern, particularly when writing up my results, was not to worry about the wider implications yet – don’t try to make a well-rounded connection between the findings and the theory straight away – and instead to just write up what I thought were the general impressions and ideas from the findings; in essence, to be like Dennis Denuto in The Castle and focus on ‘the vibe’ (albeit with a little more detail than Dennis):
Writing about the vibe of a study, like writing with no filter, provides the opportunity to get the foundations ready, to get some words on the page; it doesn’t matter if they get edited or cut later, because they’re also a warm-up for continued writing, building up momentum so that, after a few hundred words, some kind of rhythm has been established and it’s easier to keep going (ideally, at least). It is also a good bridging step between an initial stenographic examination of the subject and a final, cohesive, insightful paper.
3. the Mrs Landingham reminder
Sometimes, though, trying to get going – even with the vibe – can still seem too hard. There are a few ways to trick the brain into easing the pressure – if a piece has to go to peer review, then there will be opportunities (and most likely necessities) to revise later, or remembering that perfect ≠ done, for example – and when working with others there is far more guilt in potentially letting people down than if writing by myself. In that case, it’s worth remembering what the long-term benefits would be from doing the work (having a paper written, even if gets rejected) vs. the short-term cost, and being realistic about how much work is required to get to a submittable version.
On days where I feel like I’m avoiding work not because I don’t want to do it – that I’ve decided not to do it, because it’s not useful, or I’ve actively said no (apparently saying “no” is a valid strategy!) – but because I feel it’s all too hard (even though I’ve done it before and I just need to get going on it for it all to get better), my popular culture reference moves from Dennis Denuto to Mrs. Landingham from the West Wing:
It’s not the “then God, Jed, I don’t want to know you” sentiment that’s motivating here; it’s more just someone else spelling out exactly the thing that is stopping the work (that it just seems too hard), and how selfish or self-defeating that reason can be. It’s not too hard, and the worst that happens – if the paper gets written – is it doesn’t get accepted for the first thing for which it is submitted, in which case it gets revised and improved and gets repurposed for something or somewhere else. Granted, it can be a lot harder to do this than think it, but the reality is that the short-term anguish is just that, and soon it’s over.
After all, once a paper is sent out, it stops being your problem for a while – and the relief of there being nothing you can do about it for a while is, honestly, such a great feeling.
I guess I should stop procrastinating now…
- September 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
- November 2014
- November 2013
- September 2013
- July 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- June 2012
- January 2012
- November 2011
- August 2011
- June 2011
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- March 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008