Check out http://more.zites.net/rules/rules-beta-1-drupalcon!

Nicht immer ist das Neue im Alten etwas zusätzliches, dass zum Alt-Bekannten hinzutritt, manchmal ist das Neue auch darin, dass etwas abtritt. Ein prägnantes Beispiel sind die Vermittler (oha, kein sinnvoller Wikipedia-Eintrag!) oder Gatekeeper (soziologisch oder medientheoretisch) oder Intermediaries. Beispiele sind Journalist_innen, Musikindustrie, Hausarztsystem, Microsoft, Reisebüro, Bibliothekar_innen, Apotheken u.a.m. Nun ist das Verschwinden der Vermittler, die Disintermediation (völlig unzureichend erfasst in Wikipdia-DE) kein neues Phänomen.

Während der DotCom-Blase wurde die Disintermediation verkündet, sie trat aber dann nicht ein. Die Vermittler hatten sich rechtzeitig darauf eingestellt und die eine Gegenstrategie entwickelt mit dem netten Namen »bricks and clicks«. Das ist, kurz gesagt, die Verbindung von offline (»bricks«) und online (»clicks«) Präsenz des jeweiligen Geschäfts. Aber die Erholung währte nicht lange, nun sind sie dran. Schritt für Schritt werden die Vermittler auskooperiert.

Eine neue noch im Entstehen begriffene Form ist Apomediation. Dabei werden die Vermittler nicht einfach abgeschafft, sondern durch neue Formen der »kollektiven Begleitung« ersetzt. Gunther Eysenback schreibt in Medicine 2.0 dazu:

Der Unterschied zwischen einem Intermediary und einem Apomediary ist, dass ein Intermediary »zwischen« (lateinisch: inter- bedeutet »zwischen«) dem Konsumenten und der Information / Dienstleistung steht, was bedeutet, dass er ein notwendiger Vermittlungsagent ist, um die Information überhaupt zu bekommen. (…) Im Unterschied dazu bedeutet Apomediation, dass es Agenten gibt (Menschen, Werkzeuge), die »stand by« sind (lateinisch: apo- bedeutet separat, losgelöst, getrennt von), um den Konsumenten zu qualitativ hochwertigen Informationen und Dienstleistungen zu leiten… (eigene Übersetzung)

Apomediation basiert auf sozialen Netzwerken, Teilhabe, Zusammenarbeit und Offenheit. Ein vergleichbarer Prozess sei generell in den Wissenschaften zu beobachten. Gemeinsam genutzte Bookmarks oder der Übergang von Experten-Peer-Review Journalen zu netzbasierten Peer Review Modellen seien Beispielen. Allerdings gäbe es auch noch eine Reihe offener Forschungsfragen, etwa wie sich Apomediation-Modelle vor Betrügern schützen können.

Vom 4. bis 5 September widmet sich eine internationale Medicine-2.0-Konferenz in Toronto (Kanada) diesen Fragen: Web 2.0 in Health and Medicine.

watz posted a photo:

watz posted a photo:

Countering media representations of the food crisis as unexpected, George Caffentzis argues that its essential role in thwarting resistance to neoliberalism's enclosures and austerity measures was thoroughly predictable

read more

watz posted a photo:

watz posted a photo:

watz posted a photo:

I recently wrote a piece for the National Alliance for Media Arts and Culture (NAMAC) discussing the importance of White Space Devices and remaining a critical consumer of the so-called "information" being fed to them by Shure and the NAB. Due to space constraints, I did have to cut one of my favorite (though a bit wonky) parts from the article. I've included the original text below the article -- it illustrates how hypocritical and duplicitous Shure and the NAB have been in their dealings with cultural organizations.

From www.namac.org/node/5051:

White Space Devices and the Battle over Innovation: Public Access vs. Industry Control of the Airwaves

by Sascha D. Meinrath

I wouldn’t be surprised if you’ve never heard of a “White Space Device.” And yet, white space devices have the potential to be one of the most revolutionary new technologies to come along in the past twenty years. White space devices (WSDs) take advantage of wireless innovations and advances in computer processing power and automatically detect unoccupied TV frequencies—allowing the public to reuse spectrum that would otherwise go to waste, for everything from home networking to broadband connectivity. For consumers, they’re very similar to (and would be integrated within) the wireless devices we use today—such as wireless-equipped laptop computers, cell phones, PDAs, next-generation video game systems, and community media broadcast networks. White space devices will have a greater positive impact than wi-fi and spur far more innovation than mobile phones. They will revolutionize communications by spurring competition over new products, services, and applications.

And yet, the trade press and inside-the-Beltway media have been inundated by a massive, multi-million dollar PR campaign (including TV ads, websites, and full-page print ads), and Congressional offices have been swarmed by hundreds of lobbyists, all claiming that white space devices will destroy television broadcasting and make wireless microphones inoperable.

Why then has a large and growing coalition of public interest and consumer groups (including the Consumer Federation of America; Consumers’ Union, who publish Consumer Reports; EDUCAUSE, which represents institutions of higher learning; Common Cause; the National Hispanic Media Coalition, which advocates for “media and telecommunications policies that benefit the Latino community”; New America Foundation; Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ; Prometheus Radio Project; and US PIRG) teamed up with a growing number of high-tech companies (including Google, Dell, HP, Motorola, and Microsoft) to support white space devices? If consumers and businesses that are innovating new technologies are fighting for these devices, who’s funding the lobbying and PR against them? And what does this all have to do with the arts and cultural community?

I first joined NAMAC over half a decade ago and have been actively organizing community media and the arts for quite some time. I co-founded the Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center (UCIMC) in 2000, created the UCIMC’s all-ages arts and performance venue in 2002, took part in the “Community Engagement Through Media” salon that NAMAC held in 2004, and have coordinated countless community media and arts projects over the years. I mention this because when I talk about the enormous benefits that white space devices hold for cultural venues, I do so as someone who wants to see them available both for use by the general media-and-arts community and by the organizations and projects that I help lead.

Recently, I have read talking points created specifically to mislead arts and cultural organizations and so-called “facts sheets” that no one wants to put their name behind because they’re so completely ridiculous and full of misinformation. As a practitioner, I felt it was important to provide information and resources to counter the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that is being manufactured by the opponents of white space devices. Public interest groups like the New America Foundation may not have the PR funding and lobbying power of the National Association of Broadcasters or microphone manufacturers Shure Incorporated, but we do have venues like this one to get the truth out about what white space devices are and the benefits they provide to arts and cultural organizations.

So what are “white spaces”? And why do some companies want to stop white space devices?

White spaces are vacant frequencies between occupied (licensed) broadcast channels or broadcast auxiliary services like wireless microphones. If you’ve ever used an old TV, the unoccupied channels that just show “snow” are the white spaces. After the completion of the DTV transition in February 2009, the amount of white space in most of the nation’s 210 local TV markets will greatly exceed the amount of occupied spectrum, even in most major cities. In essence, white spaces are an enormous, underutilized resource that the media and arts community (along with the rest of the general public) could be using for next-generation digital media and low-cost communications. The Public Interest Spectrum Coalition wants to open up access to these unoccupied bands for everyone by allowing wireless devices certified by the FCC to operate on vacant frequencies—in much the same way that tens of millions of wi-fi devices are in use today in laptop computers.

Opponents of WSDs have launched a misinformation campaign in an attempt to prevent more widespread access to the TV bands. While the broadcast industry lobby has attempted to convince newcomers to the discussion that WSDs cannot work, these WSD detractors have systematically ignored data showing that even the pre-prototype WSDs being tested by the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology work exceptionally well. What is particularly ironic is that unlicensed wireless microphones are already in use throughout the United States—these devices already use unused TV bands, and have done so for years; yet the same companies that manufacture and use wireless microphones are the ones saying that other devices won’t work.

Upon closer examination, opponents of white space devices have a remarkably simple problem—white space devices will make communications far more distributed and hardware far cheaper. For the National Association of Broadcasters, it means that local communities will be able to broadcast video and audio for free—which means competition and diversity on the airwaves. For Shure Incorporated, it means that a whole new generation of wireless microphones—white space device wireless microphones—will be entering the market, dramatically increasing competition and lowering the costs of this hardware.

If you look at the sides in the battle over white space devices, the only opponents of white space devices are the corporations that want to keep their own lock on this market. These companies want to ensure that arts and cultural organizations cannot build their own infrastructures, don’t have access to alternative distribution networks, and are not able to buy equipment from (lower-cost) competitors. Knowing that these battle lines were a losing proposition, opponents of white space devices have hired PR experts to “educate” arts and community organizations and win them over to their side.

Already, we’ve seen several very public marketing campaigns where several arts and cultural groups are made the public face of opponents to white space devices (in ads paid for by NAB and Shure). This is particularly egregious since these organizations are basically fighting against the best interests of the general public and that of their sister organizations. Recently, Country Music Television, the County Music Association, the Grand Ole Opry, and Viacom’s MTV Networks demanded that the FCC stop the white space proceedings (see: http://tinyurl.com/3hfouf). As this story was going to press, the Broadway League filed a petition with the FCC where they claimed that WSDs will “effectively cripple…Broadway.” According to sources familiar with the proceedings, the Broadway League comments were written in consultation with a paid lobbyist for Shure. Cultural organizations like the ones that recently petitioned the FCC have to be particularly careful not to become the mouthpieces for corporate lobbyists—particularly when those interests actually run counter to the best interests of the larger arts community.

What are the public benefits of white space devices?

TV frequencies are a valuable data networking tool for the same reasons they are desirable for television broadcasts—they easily penetrate obstacles such as buildings and trees and can reach longer distances than the higher frequencies used by wi-fi devices. Every region in America has a large quantity of unoccupied TV white space. Although the particular empty channels vary in each local market, in most parts of the nation a majority of local TV frequencies are not being used, but could be, to create everything from affordable broadband access to local media distribution. Currently, the vast majority of community and municipal wireless networks—commercial, municipal and community nonprofits, public-private partnerships, etc.—use unlicensed spectrum to transmit data. While existing use of unlicensed spectrum has driven a remarkable amount of innovation, opening more low-frequency spectrum for WSDs is the “rocket fuel” needed to facilitate and scale-up home, business, and regional networks. Below are just some of the benefits of white space devices:

Enhanced Local Coverage and Communications
Local communities could use WSDs to enable mobile video and audio services and citizen journalism. These services would provide information of special interest to the local residents (for example, a town hall or PTA meeting), coverage of local sporting events (for example, the high school football game), and new methods for local advertisers to reach customers in a more targeted and valued manner. As WSD technologies are integrated into next-generation wireless microphones and other media equipment, these systems will be substantially less prone to interference than today’s “dumb” equipment (which are often incapable of sensing whether other devices are transmitting on the channel they intend to use). In the same way that digital media equipment has spurred a new wave of consumer-generated media, the ad-hoc and distributed information dissemination networks that WSDs make possible will encourage the sharing of local content and user-generated content.

Enterprise Networking
From a base of essentially zero in 2000, an estimated 60% of U.S. corporations now provide some type of wireless networking using unlicensed spectrum last year. On May 25, 2006, in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee, Roger Cochetti, federal policy director of the Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA), stated that reallocating the TV white spaces for unlicensed use “will be used by small business to improve their productivity, not least of which will be access to new wireless broadband services.”

Rural Broadband Deployment
The highly favorable propagation characteristics of the TV broadcast spectrum allow for wireless broadband deployment with greater range of operation at lower power levels. Thus, the TV white spaces could be used to provide better broadband service in less densely populated areas or as a first broadband service in many underserved areas, including rural and other remote areas. Today more than 3,000 wireless ISPs and rural telephone cooperatives already rely on the current “junk” bands of unlicensed spectrum to provide broadband to remote customers, mostly in rural areas. Which is why the Wireless Internet Service Provider Association (WISPA) and the National Telecom Cooperative Association (NCTA) have been advocates of opening the TV white spaces for unlicensed access.

Education and Enterprise Video Conferencing
The TV white spaces could be used to give local high schools and middle schools the same multimedia capabilities available to major university campuses: mobile, high-speed Internet access for every student and teacher with a laptop or portable wireless device. WSDs also can be used to increase the reliability and decrease the cost of video conferencing on college and commercial campuses. Such video conferencing could help enable distance learning for students in remote locations for whom traditional classroom-based learning is impractical. This is why EDUCAUSE, which represents the nation’s colleges and universities on technology issues, is a leading advocate for white space devices.

Personal Consumer Applications
WSDs could be used to provide new services and applications to consumers by taking advantage of the improved signal reliability, capacity, and range of the TV broadcast spectrum. Wireless local area networks using low power and battery-operated devices could enable new communications technologies that bring safety, convenience, and comfort to consumers in their homes. This is why major consumer groups like the Consumers Federation of America and the Consumers Union support opening the TV spectrum to white space devices.


The take-home message

The FCC is completing a critical phase of the process needed to bring WSDs to consumers. Extensive feasibility testing has been conducted and extensively documented, and this testing has demonstrated that WSDs can and do work. A new round of feasibility testing is currently underway and will add further support for the viability of WSD technologies. The next step will be for the FCC to issue the necessary technical specifications for WSDs based upon the empirical data collected during feasibility testing and regulatory precedent. The FCC will then be able to certify consumer devices, ensuring that those devices meet required technical standards. Only after all three phases of this process are completed will consumer WSDs be made available to the general public.

Taken together, this multi-step process will ensure that WSDs co-exist with current license holders without causing harmful interference, and that manufacturers and implementers will have the flexibility to develop new features and innovative uses for WSDs. Public interest groups have been vocal in their support of rigorous testing and also have remained committed to the end goal of certifying useful new wireless technologies that operate within TV bands without causing harmful interference to licensed users.

For arts and cultural organizations, this process (and white space devices generally), have the potential to add much needed tools to help us conduct our work. New, less-expensive video and audio communications equipment, wireless broadband services, and a host of social networking and geo-locational applications are just around the corner.

For those who would like to find out more about the issue of white space devices (WSDs):
• Check out the Wireless Innovation Alliance
• Read the policy backgrounder on WSDs.
• Or contact Sascha Meinrath directly at the New America Foundation—especially if your organization would like to join the Public Interest Spectrum Coalition or the Wireless Innovation Alliance.

 

NOTES

(1) The share of the DTV band (channels 2 to 51) that will be vacant after the February 2009 turnoff of analog transmission ranges from 30% in the most congested, coastal markets (e.g., Trenton, NJ) to 80% or more in small-town and rural markets (e.g., Fargo, ND). For more information and a survey mapping available white space in a representative number of TV markets, see Measuring the TV “White Space” Available for Unlicensed Wireless Broadband, New America Foundation and Free Press, January 2006.

(2) Pages 1-2 of comments filed with the FCC in proceeding 04-186, 06/18/08 and signed by The Broadway League, Nederlander Producing Company of America, Jujamcyn Theaters, 321 Management, NAMCO, The Shubert Organization, White Dog Productions, Ostar Theatricals, Aged in Wood, Circle in the Square Theatre, Iron Mountain Productions, Scorpio Entertainment, Manhattan Theater Club, Center Theater Group of Los Angeles, Alan Wasser Associates, Adam Epstein Company, Scorpio Entertainment, Iron Mountain Productions, Richmark Entertainment of Los Angeles, Berlind Productions, Helen Hayes Theatre, Fox Associates, Dodger Theatricals, The Producing Office, Broadway Across America, Vienna Waits Productions, Jeffrey Richards Associates, Tonka Productions, Marc Platt Productions, and Richard Climan.

(3) Telecommunications Industry Association, 2006 Telecommunications Market Review and Forecast, p. 188. For a larger estimate, see In-Stat, “In-Depth Analysis: Wireless Data in the Enterprise: The Hockey Stick Arrives,” December 2006. See also ABI Research, “Enterprise IP Telephony,” 2006.

(4) CompTIA’s 20,000 members are predominantly among the nation’s 32,000 value-added resellers, a $43 billion industry that deploys IT networks for small- to medium-sized businesses and professional offices across the country.

(5) Roger J. Cochetti, CompTIA Testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, May 25, 2006.

SASCHA MEINRATH is research director of the New America Foundation's Wireless Future Program and a board member and co-founder of the Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Foundation. He blogs regularly at www.publicponderings.com.

Here's the original text from the end of the section, "So what are 'white spaces'? And why do some companies want to stop white space devices?":

Already, we've seen several very public marketing campaigns where several arts and cultural groups are made the public face of opponents to white space devices (in ads paid for by NAB and Shure). This is particularly egregious since these organizations are basically fighting against the best interests of the general public and that of their sister organizations. Recently, Country Music Television, the County Music Association, the Grand Ole' Opry, and Viacoms' MTV Networks demanded that the FCC stop the white space proceedings (see: http://tinyurl.com/3hfouf); and, as this story was going to press, the Broadway League filed a petition with the FCC where they claimed:
Granting immediate national access [by white space devices] will effectively cripple dozens of long standing industries, including Broadway...Google's plan, essentially, recommends the use of (1) beacons, which would be purchased by current white space users to jam local transmissions in the white space spectrum, (2) a signal “safe harbor,” granting incumbent users exclusive use to channels 36-38, and (3) use of spectrum sensing technology. As has been noted in other recent filings, this proposal is patently flawed and essentially ineffective.

According to sources familiar with the proceedings, the Broadway League comments were written in consultation with a paid lobbyist for Shure Microphone. Unfortunately, they position arts and cultural groups as a lunatic fringe, allowing Shure and the NAB to hide behind the public face of these organizations. In fact, Shure is using arts organizations as a facade to fight for a position that it does not hold itself. As Shure's own filing with the FCC states:

The introduction of new unlicensed devices in the television broadcast bands must be done carefully to avoid causing interference problems on a grand scale. In these comments, we have recommended a three-part solution for mitigating interference to wireless microphones:
• Designate 6 “exempt” TV channels in each television market, in which unlicensed devices would not operate.
• Use of cognitive “spectrum sensing” techniques by unlicensed devices to prevent transmission in TV channels that are occupied by incumbent users, including television broadcasting stations, wireless microphones, and wireless audio systems.
• Use of an RF “smart beacon” transceiver to enhance the interference prevention capabilities of spectrum sensing at greater distances, as described above.

In essence, Shure made the exact same proposal several years ago that engineers from numerous other technology companies have supported more recently. Cultural organizations like the ones that recently petitioned the FCC have to be particularly careful not to become the mouth pieces for corporate lobbyists – particularly when those interests actually run counter to the best interests of the larger arts community. The fact that Shure itself knows that the position that the Broadway League and its allies took was at odds with their own public filing makes this example particularly egregious.

The first quote is from pages 1-2 of comments filed with the FCC in proceeding 04-186, 06/18/08 and signed by The Broadway League, Nederlander Producing Company of America, Jujamcym Theaters, 321 Management, NAMCO, The Shubert Organization, White Dog Productions, Ostar Theatricals, Aged in Wood, Circle in the Square Theatre, Iron Mountain Productions, Scorpio Entertainment, Manhattan Theater Club, Center Theater Group of Los Angeles, Alan Wasser Associates, Adam Epstein Company, Scorpio Entertainment, Iron Mountain Productions, Richmark Entertainment of Los Angeles, Berlind Productions, Helen Hayes Theatre, Fox Associates, Dodger Theatricals, The Producting Office, Broadway Across America, Vienna Waits Productions, Jeffrey Richards Associates, Tonka Productions, Marc Platt Productions, and Richard Climan. The second quote is from pages 50-51 of comments filed by Shure Incorporated, 12/01/04.

The Washington Post just ran an article about Shared Spectrum, a company that's been developing white space devices for many years for DARPA. I've been following Shared Spectrum's work for awhile now -- the most interesting element about it is that they're already doing what the National Association of Broadcasters says isn't possible. Here's more from the Post:

An engineer, Mark A. McHenry litters his speech with dizzying terms like gigahertz and cognitive radio. But on one topic in the national news he is plain-spoken: the claim by the broadcast networks, the NBCs and CBSs of the world, that a new technology to provide Internet service over the air will interfere with TV viewing.

"They're wrong," says McHenry, the chief executive of Shared Spectrum, a Vienna technology company.

The Federal Communications Commission is weighing a proposal that would allow companies to share airwaves. McHenry said his eight-year-old, 30-person firm has already received $30 million from the Defense Department to develop the concept. The broadcasters' position is "not what the DoD thinks," McHenry said. "It works in the harshest environments."

Im Auftrag von Walter Praszl Leitung Neue Medien,

Unsere Anforderungen:
Drupal 6
Anpassung von View Scripten
Einbindung eigener Templates
Modulentwicklung
Entwicklung von CCK-Typen
Anpassungen der Suchfunktionalitäten

Besten Dank und liebe Grüße aus Wien
Walter Praszl
Leitung Neue Medien

S.I.M. Special Interest Magazines Zeitschriftenverlagsges. m. b. H.
Erdbergstraße 35/12
1030 Wien
Austria

Telefon: (+43-1) 513 22 05/13
Fax: (+43-1) 513 22 05/4
Firmenbuchnummer: FN 46189a
UID-Nummer: 19170206
Gerichtsstand: Handelsgericht Wien
Geschäftsführer: Emil Köll

Internet: www.simskultur.net