Categories
History

Call for Issue 3 of The Poster #Journal #CfP

Special Issue on the visual rhetorics of command and control for The Poster Journal.

Call theme

Visual rhetorics are by definition in the business of persuasion: in both private and public spheres, such rhetorics attempt to change the behaviours of both individuals and groups. From the “Stop” sign at the end of our street, through the visual and verbal warnings on packs of cigarettes, to the recruitment posters of our armed forces, common sense instruction blends into health-expert authority insistence and then into state invitations to die for one’s country.

In this first special issue of The Poster, we invite contributions on the many and different ways in which visual rhetoric intends and is used to inform, instruct, persuade and control our lives. Submissions should be in for October 14th 2011.

The Poster

  • Are all visual communications artefacts, at their core, attempts to control others?
  • Are some media forms and technologies more effective agencies for control than others?
  • Is it possible to have a rhetorically neutral communication.
  • Are there visual forms that indicate a form of visual persuasion as opposed to an honest source of information: or is the distinction impossible to make.
  • Who uses visual rhetoric in this way?
  • How may visual rhetoric be resisted?
  • Can we determine where and how informing turns into instruction and where instruction turns into compulsion?
  • From the point of view of authorship how the control is communicated to the public sphere?
  • What are their “tools”
  • How does visual persuasion address ethical and moral issues?

Call focus

The work of artists, designers and other visual practitioners is vitally important to The Poster and in this spirit we are actively seeking visual contributions from practitioners whose work addresses the mechanics of visual control. Visual contributions can be submitted as either peer or non-peer reviewed work (see below for submission information). We are also seeking papers and articles: research, critical, philosophical and theoretical papers on the call theme. All papers will be subject to a rigorous blind peer review process before publication. The journal supports the active exchange of views and encourages contributors to present strong stances where their research supports them.

We also call for reviews of books, exhibitions, mass media and examples of visual rhetorics where they are thematically relevant and are likely to engage the reader’s interests.

Submission details

Papers – Papers should, in the first instance, be provided as MS Word (.doc or .docx), Open Document Text (.odt) or Rich Text Format (.RTF) files with low-resolution images (72dpi) included in the text at the intended positions in the text. Both colour and greyscale images are welcome. Please help us out by using the standard Heading 1 (H1, H2, H3) and Text Body styles as this, and the indication of position of the images, helps us enormously in the editing and production of the final document. Papers should be between 5000 and 8000 words long. Once a paper is accepted we’ll ask for the full resolution images.

Visual contributions – The contributions may be on any subject relevant to the theme but should demonstrate an explicable intent. They should be presented, in the first instance, as low-resolution .jpg or .png files (72 dpi), numbered or otherwise ordered in the way they will be read (if ambiguity is the intent please help us out by sending us a visual that explains their intended organisation). Please include (as either metadata or on an accompanying list) details of copyright, authorship and ownership.

Reviews should be between 1000 and 2000 word long and if they carry images or excerpts of the reviewed material should be copyright cleared with the author or the owners of the intellectual copyright.

Categories
Academic Digital

Journals: A more social means of publishing?

http://www.sxc.hu/photo/913588Should the peer-review process for academic journals be by-passed for a more online/social means of publishing?

Pickrell went on to describe, in general detail, the features this journal-killing app would require. It would bypass the formal peer review process, taking pre-publication papers and allowing a community of users (scholars and experts, most likely) to vote papers up or down — much like social bookmarking sites such as Reddit do for articles in the popular press. The idea would be to let readers decide which articles deserve top billing, rather than ceding that task to a tiny cloister of journal editors and their hand-picked reviewers. Papers with good feedback would shoot to the top of the list. And if scholars do want proxies to help them decide if an article is worthy of their trust and attention, they could turn to the recommendations of their friends and colleagues. ….

Still, skeptics wanted to know: In such a wild west of scholarly publishing, who would check facts? Pickrell’s answer is the same as Wikipedia’s: everybody. “I think the system could be totally self-regulating with a big enough community,” he said in an interview withInside Higher Ed. The most popular articles would receive the most attention, but they would also receive the most scrutiny. Errors are unlikely to escape a critical mass of studied readers. Mechanisms could be put in place to report errors and redact articles. (Think Wikipedia, but with original research and a specialized corps of volunteer editors.)…

“People read papers and they discuss them,” Pickrell told Inside Higher Ed, but “they don’t necessarily discuss them online. And I think eventually they will…. The issue is going to be getting people involved, and that’s going to be less and less of an issue as time goes on.

Read full article.

Categories
Academic Digital

Open Access Journals: Has the shine faded?


The recent launch of several high-profile open-access journals by commercial publishers including Nature Publishing Group and SAGE elicited cheers from veterans of the open-access movement.

Here, they thought, was evidence that their ideal of making research freely available online, as expressed in 2002’s landmark Budapest Open Access Initiative document, was finally gaining mainstream traction.

But according to Christopher Pressler, director of research library services at the University of London, the enthusiasm for “gold” (journal-based) open access is relatively recent and amounts to a “fundamental compromise” necessitated by the open-access movement’s failure to plan for the financial sustainability and academic appeal of “green” open access, which is built around self-archiving papers in institutional repositories.

He contended that librarians’ original goal in pushing for open access was to take academic publishing away from the commercial enterprises they perceived to be making unjustifiably large profits from charging universities for access to their own research.

Mr Pressler told Times Higher Education that the rise of gold open access could lead to an even greater drain on university budgets due to some publishers’ alleged practice of “double dipping”: charging authors for open-access options without reducing subscription prices proportionately.

Read full story

Categories
Academic Digital

CALLS FOR SUBMISSIONS FOR A SPECIAL ISSUE: TEACHING DIGITAL MEDIA

Here’s a journal I wish that I’d been in a position to submit an article to, but my diary is rather stuffed (at least til the end of June!), but I look forward to seeing what is produced…

Deadline: November 30, 2010 Guest Editor: Mary McAleer Balkun

The editors seek articles (5,000-10,000 words) and media essays (overviews on books, film, video, performance, art, music, websites, etc. 3,000 to 5,000 words) and items for an occasional feature, “The Material Culture of Teaching,” that explore the uses of digital media in all pedagogical contexts and disciplinary perspectives.

Submissions should explore the application or impact of any form of digital media on teaching and learning, including but not restricted to digital/digitized materials, specific software, social media, virtual environments, audio or visual media, and the internet.  We welcome essays from all disciplinary and interdisciplinary perspectives. Transformations  publishes only essays that focus on pedagogical praxis and/or pedagogical theory.

Possible topics for pedagogy-related articles:

  • Teaching digital media as a subject
  • Distance Learning
  • Digital texts
  • Mapping software/Social Geography
  • Creation of new knowledge
  • Collaboration
  • Virtual worlds
  • Digital storytelling
  • Unintended consequences of using digital media
  • Authorial/Ownership issue
  • Creative commons
  • Ethics and digital media
  • Access issues
  • Social media/social networking
  • Technologies of plagiarism
  • Libraries in the digital age
  • Email and the historical record
  • Politics of knowledge
  • Globalization and digital media
  • Faculty development
  • Portability of learning materials
  • Censorship/Self censorship
  • Class/race/gender and digital media
  • Digital media and the arts
  • Personal vulnerability in the digital world
  • Creating digital media
  • Immediacy/Ubiquity of information
  • Discipline shifts

Send submissions or inquiries in MLA format (7th ed.) as attachments in MS Word (.doc) or Rich Text format to: Jacqueline Ellis and Ellen Gruber Garvey, Editors, transformations@njcu.edu. Author(s) name and contact information should be included on a SEPARATE page.

See information here.

Categories
Digital

Submission fees could pave way to open-access future

Defray scholarly journals’ peer-review costs with per-paper charge, study advises. Paul Jump writes

Major journals could move to an open-access model if they charged a fee for every paper submitted to them, a study has suggested.

Most open-access journals are currently funded solely via charges to the authors of papers accepted for publication.

However, high-profile journals such as Science and Nature do not offer open-access options on the grounds that their high rejection rates would force them to impose prohibitively high charges in order to cover the cost of administering peer review.

But a new report commissioned by Knowledge Exchange, the European association of organisations committed to open access, says that a better business model for journals that reject more than 70 per cent of submitted articles would be to combine charges for accepted papers – known as article-processing charges – with submission fees.

Read full article in Times Higher Education.