Pine wrote:
>
> I'm finding it encouraging to see that a number of researchers and
> journalists are taking these problems seriously, trying to understand them,
> and trying to improve the situation.
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/tech/misinformation-on-social-media-could…
I'm encouraged by the studies, but confused about why the fake news
phenomenon is considered novel, rather than continuations of age-old
disinformation, yellow journalism, aggressive public relations,
manufactured consent, astroturfing, propaganda, and deceptive
marketing. There's nothing new about it other than the term.
Hi all,
One of my PhD students, Meen Chul Kim, is a data scientist with experience
in bibliometrics and we will be working on some citation-related research
together with Aaron and Dario in the coming months. Our main goal in the
short term is to develop an enhanced citation dataset that will allow for
future analyses of citation data associated with article quality,
lifecycle, editing trends, etc.
The project page is here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Understanding_the_context_of_citat…
The project is just getting started so this is a great time to offer
feedback and suggestions, especially for features of citations that we
should mine as a first step, since this will affect what the dataset can be
used for in the future.
Looking forward to seeing some of you at WikiCite!!
Andrea
--
:: Andrea Forte
:: Associate Professor
:: College of Computing and Informatics, Drexel University
:: http://www.andreaforte.net
Hi all,
I've started working on a paper with folks who ran a fascinating project
called "Wikipedia Primary School" [1] where they investigated different
mechanisms or models for eliciting and developing Wikipedia content that
was relevant to the South African national primary school curriculum. We
are currently writing a paper that assesses each of the different types of
"interventions" that were tested/tried out in trying to fill in these gaps
- including editathons, contests and collaborations with scientific
journals. It seems as though there are a host of different types of models
that are used to fill in Wikipedia's gaps beyond the original "volunteer
edits what interests them in their spare time" model (e.g. Wikipedians in
residence, editing Wikipedia as part of class assignments). If anyone has
any good references to work already undertaken in this area please let me
know!
Many thanks,
Heather.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Primary_School
Dr Heather Ford
University Academic Fellow
School of Media and Communications <http://media.leeds.ac.uk/>, The
University of Leeds
w: hblog.org / EthnographyMatters.net <http://ethnographymatters.net/> / t:
@hfordsa <http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa>
This is coming from a group of scholars and developers interested in the
phenomenon of fake news and of misinformation in general. I am sure several
people on this list will be interested in this!
Cheers
G
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jennifer 8. Lee <jenny8lee(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon, May 1, 2017 at 4:18 PM
Subject: [fakenewssci] Credibility Schema working group
To: fakenewssci(a)googlegroups.com
A project some folks in this group should find interesting.
***
Hacks/Hackers, Meedan and others are working together on a new
initiative to create a schema around news credibility. We’re gathering
folks in San Francisco and NYC over the next six weeks.
• May 11 in San Francisco (downtown location TBD)
• June 7 in New York (at Columbia Universty's Brown Institute of Media
Innovation).
Both of these events will be a one-day workshop to develop training
data for content online, and we'd have an agenda for 15-20 people in
each location.
Here's the lowdown on the working group:
PROJECT SUMMARY
The credibility schema working group is an initiative to convene a
critical mass of researchers, data scientists, journalists, librarians
and others to address the challenge of developing training data for
better machine learning algorithms and services that address
misinformation ecosystems. We aim to build off the great work done by
the Trust Project. and First Draft, and combine both a journalistic
and machine learning approach to this project.
As concerns grow about the importance of establishing credible
content, two challenges emerge: (1) how to communicate this
credibility as content travels around the web, often separated from
its original source, and (2) how to handle massive amounts of content
at scale. Addressing both of these challenges requires new approaches
and techniques: for the former, a new set of interoperable data
schema, and for the latter, training data based on those schema that
can be applied to machine learning algorithms.
The need for technical schema emerged out of an impromptu working
group at MisinfoCon, a conference on misinformation and journalism at
MIT Media Lab hosted by Hacks/Hackers, First Draft News and the Nieman
Foundation for Journalism, after it was clear that many groups were
working to make this happen. We will be having two gatherings — one in
San Francisco and one in New York — to engage a core working group who
have expressed an interest in this topic.
You can read more about that workshop here:
https://misinfocon.com/building-technical-standards-for-credibility-59ef9ee…
INTERESTED? WHAT WE NEED FROM YOU:
If you are interested in attending, please email me at
jenny(a)hackshackers.com and An Xiao Mina at an(a)meedan.com and let us
know which event you/your team can attend.
Assuming capacity is okay, we’ll make sure to put you on the list of
attendees. If you have questions, we're happy to discuss via phone or
Hangout in the coming days. And, if you know of other folks we should
invite, please let us know
--
Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia <http://glciampaglia.com/> *∙* Assistant
Research Scientist, Indiana University
SocInfo 2017 <http://socinfo2017.oii.ox.ac.uk/> *∙* Submit NOW
<https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=socinfo2017> !!!
Hello all,
My name is Andrew Hall and I’m going to be working with Aaron Halfaker over the coming months on a project looking to understand how Wikidata is used in wikis such as Wikipedia and the value that Wikidata provides them. We would also like to investigate Wikidata's use in other applications (e.g. Google Knowledge Graph). For more information on the project, check out the research proposal that we have created [1]. Definitely feel free to reach out to me with any questions or suggestions as well.
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Understanding_Wikidata%27s_Value <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Understanding_Wikidata's_Value>
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> All tracks, keynotes and workshops are directly related to Wikimedia
> movement
Interesting. How does this differ from Wikimania or WikiConference?
Are you targeting studies that just happen to use Wikipedia data for
measurement (e.g. [1]) or would you like to limit studies that target a
Wikimedia movement priority (e.g. [2])?
Generally, I aim my scientific output regarding Wikimedia stuff to big
academic conferences where other researchers are studying similar phenomena
in other field sites. For example, you can find lots of work covering
OpenStreetMap, Zooniverse, Open source development, and Open scientific
practices at ACM's OpenSym, CSCW, and GROUP conferences.
With this conference operate with formal peer review and archived
publication (like in computer science/ACM/IEEE) or will be more like a
pre-publication outlet (like conferences are in basically all the other
disciplines)?
1. Halfaker, A., Keyes, O., Kluver, D., Thebault-Spieker, J., Nguyen, T.,
Shores, K., ... & Warncke-Wang, M. (2015, May). User session identification
based on strong regularities in inter-activity time. In *Proceedings of the
24th International Conference on World Wide Web* (pp. 410-418). ACM.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.2878.pdf
2. Halfaker, A., Geiger, R. S., Morgan, J. T., & Riedl, J. (2013). The rise
and decline of an open collaboration system: How Wikipedia’s reaction to
popularity is causing its decline. *American Behavioral Scientist*, *57*(5),
664-688.
-Aaron
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Rodrigo Padula <
rodrigopadula(a)wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
> Hello Stian,
>
> The focus of the event is exclusively Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects.
>
> All tracks, keynotes and workshops are directly related to Wikimedia
> movement and the general idea is to motivate other countries to organize
> local editions of the event based in our model started last year.
>
> This year, the international edition will be in Niteroi - Rio de Janeiro
> and probably the next edition will be in Porto - Portugal, moving the event
> each year to a different country with support from a local wikimedia
> chapter and a local university, stimulating the development of scientific
> research on Wikipedia in every corner of the planet.
>
> Best regards!
>
> Rodrigo Padula
> Coordenador de Projetos
> Wiki Educação Brasil
> http://www.wikimedia.org.br
> 21 99326-0558
>
>
>
> ---- On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:26:03 -0300 *Stian Håklev<shaklev(a)gmail.com
> <shaklev(a)gmail.com>>* wrote ----
>
> Sounds exciting, how is this different from WikiSym?
> Stian
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Rodrigo Padula <
> rodrigopadula(a)wikimedia.org.br> wrote:
>
> Hello my friends,
>
> After a very productive week attendin Wikimedia Conference in Berlin and 3
> days visiting our fellows from Portugal and many Portuguese universities in
> Lisboa, Porto and Coimbra we finally confirmed the 1st International
> Wikipedia Scientific Conference (2nd Brazilian edition).
>
> That project was created by the Wiki Education Brasil last year and was
> discussed with Wikimedia Portugal, Wikimedia Spain and many other chapters
> in Berlin.
>
> We are finishing the composition of the international scientific committee
> and the general organization committee during the next weeks.
>
> The event will be in Niterói - Rio de Janeiro in November 8-10 2017,
> organized in partnership with the Federal Fluminense University.
>
> To have global coverage, we will need your help to promote the conference
> in your country and universities.
>
> Our team is producing press releases and printed materials (A4 and A3)
> with information regarding the event and the call for papers.
>
> Translation help will be appreciated!
>
> Here you can see some pictures of the last year's edition
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Congresso_Cient%
> C3%ADfico_Brasileiro_da_Wikip%C3%A9dia
>
> Best regards
>
> Rodrigo Padula
> Wiki Educação Brasil - User Group
> http://facebook.com/wikiedubr/
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science(a)lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science(a)lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
Hello everyone,
I am currently working with Aaron Halfaker and Dario Taraborelli at the
Wikimedia Foundation on a project exploring automated classification of
article importance. Our goal is to characterize the importance of an
article within a given context and design a system to predict a relative
importance rank. We have a project page on meta[1] and welcome comments or
thoughts on our talk page. You can of course also respond here on
wiki-research-l, or send me an email.
Before moving on to model-building I did a fairly thorough literature
review, finding a myriad of papers spanning several disciplines. We have a
draft literature review also up on meta[2], which should give you a
reasonable introduction to the topic. Again, comments or thoughts (e.g.
papers we’ve missed) on the talk page, mailing list, or through email are
welcome.
Links:
1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Automated_
classification_of_article_importance
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Automated_classification_of_articl…>
2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Studies_of_Importance
Regards,
Morten
[[User:Nettrom]] aka [[User:SuggestBot]]
Open Data Movements in the Age of Big Data Capitalism
Tue 16 May 2017
17:00 – 19:00
Organised by the Westminster Institute for Advanced Studies
309 Regent Street
University of Westminster
London W1B 2HW
Registration:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/open-data-movements-in-the-age-of-big-data-c…
A WIAS seminar with International Research Fellow Dr Arwid Lund and Open
Knowledge Activist Dr Jonathan Gray
Big data has received a lot of attention in recent years, open
data/knowledge less so, and the relation between open data/knowledge and
the predominantly commercial big data sector even less so. This seminar
aims at critically discussing and shedding light on the under-theorised
field of open data/knowledge and its relation to capitalism.
In this WIAS seminar, Dr Arwid Lund reflects on his study of the
ideological landscape underpinning the open data/knowledge movement
(Open Knowledge London). Dr Jonathan Gray focuses on his own involvement
in this movement and his forthcoming book Data Worlds: The new politics
of information. The aim of the seminar is to introduce critical
perspectives on open data/knowledge’s relation to capitalism, as well as
a critical understanding of the political character that informs its
advocates.
We will round the event off with a wine reception.
Dr Arwid Lund is a Lecturer at the Department of Arts and Cultural
Sciences, Lund University, Sweden. Arwid is completing the second part
of his WIAS fellowship from 3 April 2017 to 2 June 2017. During his
fellowship, he will be working on how ‘openness’ is understood
ideologically by advocates within the Open Knowledge Network. His aim is
to identify the ideological landscape within this movement.
Dr Jonathan Gray is a Prize Fellow at the Institute for Policy Research,
University of Bath. He is also Research Associate at the médialab of
Sciences Po and Tow Fellow at the Tow Center for Digital Journalism,
Columbia University. As Director of Policy and Research at the global
civil society organisation Open Knowledge, Jonathan has founded and
co-founded numerous initiatives, including the Data Journalism Handbook,
Europe’s Energy, Open Data for Tax Justice, OpenSpending, Open Trials,
The Public Domain Review and Where Does My Money Go?.