As an industry, coolhunting explicitly turns on this production of authenticity and legitimacy. The transaction between brand and employee is one of social—and increasingly, multicultural—capital. My own misgivings about these dynamics, however, soon gave way to more practical constraints of time and money. Or so I told myself. Really, what I would be selling was not my time, but something that I realized—albeit with cringey trepidation—was far more valuable: my own multicultural capital and connections. My wasta.

“A Spy in the House of Hip”: Trendspotting in the Middle East

If I enjoy these internet memes so much, why am I so dismissive of anthropological fads? There are probably three reasons: First, there is the erasure of disciplinary memory. Newer is not necessarily better, and it is good to show a little respect for where we came from. The second is that it is simply hard to keep up. One doesn’t just casually pick up Lacan – there is a whole new vocabulary to master. For this reason it can often feel like empire building (reason #3). By establishing a new anthropological trend one is trying to build up one’s own cultural capital while simultaneously devaluing other forms.

From “LOL Anthropology” by Savage Minds

Reason #3 is key. Fetch, even.

Anthropology of this Century, a new Anthropology Journal. As far as I can tell, all of the articles are available online. Adam Fish over at Savage Minds, a fantastic group blog about Anthropology, posted an interview with Charles Stafford, the professor behind the new journal.

Of the posted interview questions, I found this question and its subsquent response the most intriguing:

“AF [Adam Fish]: Its a simple one but one of the affordances that internet publishing has over hardcopy publishing is the capacity for fast dialogic commentary and the modeling of a virtual public sphere. As one of the moderators of this blog Savage Minds, I understand the work entailed in moderating commentary but I still find it a necessary component of online writing. Considering this, why don’t you allow comments on the articles?

CS [Charles Stafford]: The question you ask is one that I anticipated. Not only does AOTC not have serious interactivity (e.g. readers’ forums etc.), we don’t even have a letters page! This may seem odd for an online open access journal. But if people want to respond to our articles my advice is that they should stop – think carefully – and then publish a response elsewhere, either on a blog (such as yours), or in an article, or a book. The instant response is in some ways antithetical to scholarship. I’m not a big fan of it, except in the context of research seminars, such as the anthropology seminar we hold on Friday mornings at the LSE. There I can be extremely critical of someone’s ideas but this is followed by us having a drink together, and then lunch, which obviously transforms the whole interaction.”

Emphasis mine.

Otherness can be like an illness; being a stranger can be analogous to experiencing a form of madness—those same intimations of the unreal and the irrational, when everything that has been familiar is stripped away. It is hard to be a stranger. A traveler may have no power, no influence, no known identity. That is why a traveler needs optimism and heart, because without confidence travel is misery. Generally, the traveler is anonymous, ignorant, easy to deceive, at the mercy of the people he or she travels among

From “When You’re Strange”

Via The New York Review of Books Blog

“Are you saying that being phony is purely a product of the “techno-consumerist order”? Read some Erving Goffman. Please! Everyday life is full of various degrees of self-presentation. This is true of all societies, living under all levels of technological development. Tell me that being “cool, attractive, in-control” wasn’t important for pre-internet Balinese! Does that mean that they were incapable of love? How about writing letters, or (dare I say it?) novels? How is carrying around a Franzen paperback any less a part of the techno-consumerist order?”

I love it when anthropologists get pissed off; we’re such an ornery bunch. 

Via OWNI

1. The Internet will get more feral
2. Next-gen interfaces will become old hat
3. We will still be social but the way we use the networks will change
4. We will “sledge” each other…
5. There will be stubborn artefacts
6. We will be bored together
7. We will have a lot of stuff
8. We will manage our connectivity, we will manage our disconnectivity
9. We have to maintain the network
10. We will develop new anxieties

Ten predictions about the future and technology from Genevieve Bell (PhD in Anthropology from Stanford), Intel Fellow and the company’s Director of Interaction and Experience Research.

Via Experientia

I find predictions one and ten the most interesting predictions on the list. What would constitute a ‘feral’ web experience? What’s to suggest that web experience isn’t already ‘feral’ to some extent? And is there some aspect of class and geographic privilege being exercised in the use and designation of ‘feral’ (and presumably ‘domesticated’) web experiences? The term ‘feral’ web seems to, in my mind anyway, easily act as a euphemism for some kind of technology limited or stunted “other. ” A brown bodied cyborg trying to access the web via a modem connection; outside of the system but completely controlled and regulated by it. 


Presentation from the former head of Google’s UX department who’s now part of Facebook. 

Via The Scholarly Kitchen. 

Facebook is suggesting a FB friendship with Franz Boas. Our friends in common include other anthropologists. Shocking, I know…

Conversation in a full elevator encroaches on the personal space of other riders, which is already greatly reduced. The closed space imparts a sense of intimacy, and the riders who aren’t participants in the discussion are left feeling like eavesdroppers. That’s not to say that no conversation occurs, but that conversations with strangers are kept to a minimum. Conversations themselves are somewhat awkward things - you never know how they’ll go with the other person if this is a first meeting, and in the close quarters of an elevator cab it can feel as though you’re under close scrutiny.

From The Anthropology of Elevators

This is the sort of thing that makes contemporary anthropology so interesting but open to ridicule. Either way, the post is interesting and worth a read. 

Full credit.

shitmystudentswrite:

Fieldwork has not always been central to anthropology.  The idea is actually fairly recent.  The wheelchair model, where anthropologist do research through others accounts was one that was used a lot before fieldwork became popular.

I die each time I read this…

If you don’t learn how to be alone, you’ll always be lonely, that loneliness is failed solitude. We’re raising a generation that has grown up with constant connection, and only knows how to be lonely when not connected. This capacity for generative solitude is very important for the creative process, but if you grow up thinking it’s your right and due to be tweeted and retweeted, to have thumbs up on Facebook…we’re losing a capacity for autonomy both intellectual and emotional.

From Fast Company’s interview with Sherry Turkle about her new book Alone Together:Why we Expect More from Technology and Less From Each Other

This is on my list of things to read in the coming weeks. I tend to use the word alienation to make the same points Turkle makes about loneliness. Perhaps it’s time for me to think meaningfully about the difference between the two states of being. My sense is that they are both instances of internal anxieties projected onto the outside world regardless of the presence or lack thereof of other people. No doubt there are subtle differences between the two that I am overlooking.

Alcohol, however, is the drug of choice for the indie community. But why Red Stripe in the UK or Pabst Blue Ribbon in the US? I haven’t found a definitive answer, but I have several hypotheses that correspond to explanatory paradigms in the social sciences. The first would be a Marxist interpretation of economic motivations. Both Red Stripe and Pabst Blue Ribbon are relatively inexpensive. As indie audiences tend to be younger, less expensive options are preferred. However, there are several inexpensive beers to choose from, so the Marxist approach seems only partially satisfactory. Another explanation is historical particularism. This theory, associated with Franz Boas, posits that historic incidents, culture contact and the environment are the chief determining factors in cultural manifestations. Indie’s antecedents can be found in post-punk . The Clash were famously pictured drinking Red Stripe. The influence of Jamaican music in areas where punk emerged – such as Ladbroke Grove – made drinking the lager a way to express affiliation with other oppressed groups and movements in opposition to British imperialism.

Ask the indie professor: Why do so many bands drink Red Stripe?

Because I will always love something that references Marx AND Franz Boas.

(via turnabout)

Yes!

(via turnabout)

My day has been made!

I was asked to write a blog post for the Edelman Digital blog (Employer) about digital research. I used the post as an opportunity to call out the work of five digital researchers and ethnographers whose work I find valuable and insightful.

The post went live yesterday and I’ve been floored by the great feedback it has received. More importantly, I’ve been really touched by the humility of some of the researchers on the list. These people don’t have to acknowledge the list or even say thanks, but they did and it makes me respect them even more.

[Disclosure: boyd works at Microsoft’s research facility in Boston. Microsoft is an Edelman Client]

Paul Manning’s anthropological analysis of the semiotics of branding. Much of the language and style is impenetrable and obtuse. Manning’s definition of branding is a bit tenuous and confusing. The brand is essentially an aggregation of semiotic (signs and signals) moments indexing tensions and relationships between producers, consumers, material and immaterial goods.  

I work for the largest independent PR firm in the world as a research analyst. Branding is always top of mind for me because, unlike my colleagues who help create brands, I have to figure out how measure and assess their impact and reception in traditional and social media. The way I make sense of branding is to liken it to myth-making; brands are the mythology surrounding products, companies, and stakeholders.

I understand myths as the cultural space between the idealized and reality. A brand can be the idealized face of a company, the company a client wants to be. Other times, it can be a means to outright lie to stakeholders about the reality of a product, the means of its production (see Marx’s commodity fetishism) and the values of the company. My definition is not nearly as nuanced and detailed as Manning’s but it serves me well.