Jump to content


Ashley Bouder Makes The Front Page of the NY Times


  • Please log in to reply
220 replies to this topic

#211 kfw

kfw

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,237 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:47 AM

I can't get it out of my mind that this collecting of tweets will be used by some curator of some folklore museum somewhere to justify the collecting of walls from public restrooms. Not just the inscriptions, the actual walls themselves.

Well if they're going to collect tweets, they ought to collect Ballet Talk posts too. Let's take to the streets! :)

#212 Mel Johnson

Mel Johnson

    Diamonds Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,311 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:03 AM

:) That's right, let's claim our rights under the 14th Amendment: Equal Protection! Let's all make big signs and go to our next Tea Party and whip up the anarchy! "BALLET TALK TO LOC!!!"

#213 bart

bart

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,320 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:27 AM

Can we go back to discussing ballet?

I understand the sentiment, though articles about tweeting have been appearing more and more all over the media. However, we have abandoned Ms. Bouder and probably should split off the last few pages of discussion to another, non-ballet part of Ballet Talk.

If there is demand for such a split, I'll be happy to do it. In the meantime, thank goodness, there are still plenty of bona fide ballet discussions going on all over Ballet Talk. :)

As one who actually is enjoying the conversation, I have questions for Mel, kfw and others. If the Library of Congress is empowered to collect tweets and make them available for scrutiny, doesn't this imply that they are some form of public communication or in the public domain.? Would, for example, a government agency be entitled to collect recordings of telephone conversations and make THEM available to the general public? Or, is there something in the Twitter contract that gives them ownership of content, so that -- in tweeting -- one gives up the right to control future use of one's tweet?

As to including Ballet Talk in the Library of Congress: wouldn't that limit us to 140 characters per post? 99% of us would be eliminated, if that were the rule. Maybe it's time to learn how to translate, abbreviate, and compress.

#214 kfw

kfw

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,237 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:49 AM

If the Library of Congress is empowered to collect tweets and make them available for scrutiny, doesn't this imply that they are some form of public communication or in the public domain.? Would, for example, a government agency be entitled to collect recordings of telephone conversations and make THEM available to the general public? Or, is there something in the Twitter contract that gives them ownership of content, so that -- in tweeting -- one gives up the right to control future use of ones tweet?


Aren't tweets and Internet posts by nature public? Anyone can read them online. But the Twitter privacy policy does say that

Our default is almost always to make the information you provide public but we generally give you settings to make the information more private if you want.

.

Also,

We may share or disclose your non-private, aggregated or otherwise non-personal information, such as your public Tweets or the number of users who clicked on a particular link (even if only one did).



#215 Mel Johnson

Mel Johnson

    Diamonds Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,311 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 06:07 AM

That's right. Twitter is by its very nature public information, put out in the clear for anyone to access. It is therefore logical for a library to collect such information in the interest of its preservation. Besides, the donor has offered it, presumably, in "final form", with confidential and inhouse conversations deleted. Ballet Talk could do that, too, if we wanted to. The inhouse matter could be left out of what was offered for preservation or not as the donor(s) prefer.

The restroom collection at a museum is really very much the same thing, not just single examples (that's already been done), but an entire dedicated collection of walls from everywhere. It would make for a very interesting conservation and housing challenge. And then there are the "creator's rights" issues.... :)

#216 bart

bart

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,320 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 06:38 AM

Thanks, kfw, for that research. I guess that those tweeters who selected the privacy option are OUT of the Library of Congress. Or are they?

Mel, your image of the library of the future reminds me of the old Borges story, "The Library of Babel." Almost every communication is stored there -- vast undigested quantities, ultimately unusable and meaningless. Fun for browsing, though, I would imagine, and a goldmine for future graduate students.

#217 Mel Johnson

Mel Johnson

    Diamonds Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,311 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 06:59 AM

That's where my sort of job comes in. I have the curatorial slot at a history museum with a library and an archive. In archival holdings, the institution collects, preserves and holds onto donations in such form as the donor gives them. In a library, usually works collected are in final form. Museums collect, conserve and retain objects for examination and interpretation by scholars in the advancing present and future.

We may not know right now what something means, but at some time to come, somebody using the infinite monkey theory of interpretation will say, "AHA!"

As you can see, there's a lot of crossover, and that has contributed mightily to my own personal collection of gray hair - also bald spots where I've torn it out. Which hat is collecting what?

#218 papeetepatrick

papeetepatrick

    Sapphire Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,486 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 07:32 AM

Almost every communication is stored there -- vast undigested quantities, ultimately unusable and meaningless. Fun for browsing, though, I would imagine, and a goldmine for future graduate students.


What's the Salt Lake City Mormon collection of data then? Isn't that the serious stuff?

Anyway, found this comment by a professor friend who is not really worried (but why would one worry at this point? it's irreversible): "It’s dumb – it will only encourage some English PhD to do a dissertation on “The deconstruction of tweeting in post-Facebook world” or some useless ---- like that (yes, I have an opinion, ---damnit)…"

#219 papeetepatrick

papeetepatrick

    Sapphire Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,486 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 07:59 AM

Agree with Deborah that it's probably good marketing in general (at least temporarily and for maybe a few more years), but still find it ironic that it was somehow this thread that sold me 2 tickets to see Ashton at ABT, while at least purporting to sell me on various TwitterSites. Never have seen Ms. Part or Mr. Hallberg or Ms. Vishneva, no, not even on tape or DVD. But then, what the Tweeting system be without a few paleo curios left? The problem could be that the Tweeting doesn't really lead you to live performance after you do a certain amount of it, just like the rest of internet activity. I think that's likely, that it will lead to more tweeting, and will sell more Twitter, because most of the technology is designed to propagate itself: There are surely plenty of people who are satisfied with YouTubes and have reduced all their live performance attendance. That's another dissertation, but by the time you've finished one of those, it's out of date. I can't believe there were ever actually courses in WordPerfect.

#220 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,799 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 09:24 AM

I'm disappointed that this tweeting discussion (most of it negative) is still going on.
It really seems to me like this thread is now beating a dead horse.
For those that don't like/get/enjoy tweeting -- don't do it and don't read tweets.
Others (including me) see twittering as another marketing tool (albeit, still in its infancy).
From what I've read on this thread people keep repeating themselves.
Can we go back to discussing ballet?


It is rather like those zombie movies where the thing keeps coming at you until you shoot it in the head, isn't it? :) But as long as posters find it interesting they're free to post and carry on a discussion. The Tweeters will keep on tweeting no matter what we say here and good for them.

#221 Simon G

Simon G

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 564 posts

Posted 16 April 2010 - 09:49 AM

I'm disappointed that this tweeting discussion (most of it negative) is still going on.
It really seems to me like this thread is now beating a dead horse.
For those that don't like/get/enjoy tweeting -- don't do it and don't read tweets.
Others (including me) see twittering as another marketing tool (albeit, still in its infancy).
From what I've read on this thread people keep repeating themselves.
Can we go back to discussing ballet?


It is rather like those zombie movies where the thing keeps coming at you until you shoot it in the head, isn't it? :) But as long as posters find it interesting they're free to post and carry on a discussion. The Tweeters will keep on tweeting no matter what we say here and good for them.


...and lest we forget, www.twitter.com/planetjedward


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):