Select a result to preview

TLDR 106

Too Long; Didn't Read Issue 106

Published: 2017-07-14 • 📧 Newsletter

Welcome to issue #106 of TL;DR. Money and corruption are ruining the land.

This week I started posting more content to my YouTube channel. I've always been active on YouTube, but honestly didn't like the look/feel of my content. The workflow has always been too taxing as I would record, produce, and share videos. I finally was motivated this week by the great work that Richard Byrne shares on his YouTube channel. Thanks to motivation I've obtained from watching his work, I'm rebooting my work on YouTube. I'll share more on YouTube, and will include more on camera pieces soon. I'll continue to blog on my main website, and find a better way to connect the YouTube channel to the WordPress site. Let me know if you know of anything that looks good & automated.

This week I shared the following:

🔖 Key Takeaways

📺 Watch

A great video from the Thomas Frank YouTube channel examining Ben Franklin's daily routine from his 1791 autobiography. I found a couple of elements that I'll most likely add to my repertoire.

The first is taking time in my morning routine to read. I currently wake up, meditate, exercise or run for a half hour. This is followed by breakfast, shower, head into work. I usually listen to podcasts or audiobooks while I exercise. I'm wondering if I need to make it a habit to take the time and read text on paper/screen...or will the audio suffice?

Secondly, I like the idea of setting everything back into its place, or "clearing to neutral" at the end of the day. Part of this involves having a balance or stasis to your workspace so you don't futz with things as you start the next day.

📚 Read

A new research report from the Pew Research Center examining the role of harassment in digital spaces for Americans. The survey was conducted from Jan. 9th through 23rd, 2017 and included information from 4,428 U.S. adults.

This information is important as we urge individuals to share and connect in digital spaces. The Internet is the dominant text of this generation. We would not accept physical harassment, sexual harassment, stalking, or physical threats as a response to literacy practices in the "real" world. In this same manner, we should not accept these behaviors when they occur in digital environs.

The results are staggering, but also provide clear evidence about the current state of the problem. It remains to be seen whether this is a byproduct of the recent elections, or a general coarsening of public discourse. I'm also perplexed about the role/responsibility of technology firms & government to address these trends.

Fight: The WIRED guide to Net Neutrality

On Wednesday, July 12th, we held an Internet wide day of action to send a message to the FCC and demonstrate support for net neutrality. We've talked a lot about net neutrality here in TL;DR and the importance of this topic. Hopefully you saw the protest occurring online, and found some small way to voice your support. If you're in the U.S., you can still contact your representatives and the FCC.

We'll need to continue to pay attention to this over the coming weeks as the FCC proposes changes to the regulations. We also need to be aware of the hidden money and propaganda being spread by Internet Service Providers and lobbyists as they push these agendas. Please also understand that these battles will never stop as we continue to fight to keep the web open and free.

The Wall Street Journal reported this week that they found evidence of university researchers writing reports on issues that relate to business issues and regulations.

The WSJ report suggests that over the past decade, Google has helped finance hundreds of research papers to defend against regulatory challenges of its market dominance, paying $5,000 to $400,000 for the work. The report goes on to suggest that researchers share their papers before publication and allow Google representatives to give suggestions. Furthermore, the professors don't always reveal Google's backing in their research, and few disclosed the financial ties in subsequent articles on the same or similar topics. The report also suggests that Google also has compiled a "wish list" of topics and prices for reports they would like to see written.

The response from Google calls the report "highly misleading." In the response, Leslie Miller, Google's Director of Public Policy states: "Our support for the principles underlying an open internet is shared by many academics and institutions who have a long history of undertaking research on these topics — across important areas like copyright, patents, and free expression."

Last week the Internet went into a fit of fancy as The History Channel claimed that it had new evidence that Amelia Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, had survived their plane crash and been held prisoners by the Japanese on the Marshall Islands. This story was everywhere, on the television, on the Internet, and in the papers.

Apparently, through some quick Internet searches and fact-checking, this has been debunked twice by critical bloggers. As I'm writing this newsletter, I have not seen a response from The History Channel, or the news and media outlets that spread the message like wildfire.

My interest in this is not about the mystery and Amelia Earhart. I'm thinking about the implications for media and information literacy. What should the response be when a story spreads quickly and then it's later found out to be questionable. What responsibility is there for the media and information sources to spread the correction to the facts? Also, how much force and buzz should be given to the correction? Finally, as we search for facts and information about topics, how should the Internet and search engines display this information to make it easier for the reader to quickly learn the full story?

I came across this great post from Doug Belshaw and his service, Thought Shrapnel Live.

Self described data scientist, Seth Stephens-Davidowitz analysed anonymized Google search results to better understand some of the truth about our desires, beliefs, and prejudices. Stephens-Davidowitz used Google Trends to aggregate the data and help with initial analyses.

This post is an excerpt from his book, and a brief interview with the author. It provides some interesting insight into the trust that we all have with our search engine and these devices, as opposed to sharing with individuals in our inner circles.

🔨 Do

I have an infrequent podcast that I use to share interviews I conduct with experts on topics that I'm writing or researching. The challenge with my creation and publishing of the podcast is that there is a lot of work involved in the backend. I have my graduate assistant edit the audio, and then ultimately upload the files to Soundcloud for hosting.

As an aside, I've been increasingly worried as I hear the drumbeats again suggesting that Soundcloud is going out of business.

One tool that I've been hearing a lot about over the last month is Anchor. Anchor is an app for Android or iOS that will allow you to record and broadcast your voice, music, and conversations for free. This then becomes a podcast of sorts for sharing your message. The link shared at the top of this segment is from Richard Byrne and he shares an overview of the tool.

I'm evaluating my podcasting strategy and also possible uses for Anchor in my work. I suggest you try it out as well. If you're a podcaster, please let me know more about your setup.

🤔 Consider

"We are like chameleons, we take our hue and the color of our moral character, from those who are around us." — John Locke

Previous: TLDR 105 • Next: TLDR 107 • Archive: 📧 Newsletter

🌱 Connected Concepts:

Part of the 📧 Newsletter archive documenting digital literacy and technology.