According to the petition, “a centralized database of the entire population’s biometric information is a sensitive and powerful resource that provides an unprecedented mechanism for surveillance and control.  It delivers a heavy and needless blow to the rights of the individual to dignity, liberty and privacy.”

The petition is not directed against the issuance of “smart” biometric identification cards, but rather against the amassment of biometric identification data in one central database. The petitioners maintain that a biometric identification system can work without a central database, which constitutes an unnecessary invasion of privacy and a breach of citizen's security .  Other countries, such as the Netherlands, Germany, and the UK, have introduced or are introducing biometric identification systems that avoid the creation of a central database.

The Interior Ministry has been working on a plan to introduce identification cards that incorporate biometric identification (such as fingerprints and facial scans) as a means of preventing identification forgery since the technology became available. In 2007, the Interior Ministry backtracked on its prior policy and began pushing for the creation of a central database alongside the new ID cards.

In the wake of public outcry against the Biometric Database Law, which passed in the Israeli parliament (the Knesset) in 2009, a compromise was reached under which the establishment of a central database was conditioned upon the success of a two-year “voluntary pilot study” designed to evaluate the need for such a database and the scope of the information collected by it.

According to the petitioners, the pilot is only intended to give the appearance of a study, the results of which are in fact predetermined.  The Interior Ministry and the Population Authority “designed” the pilot, are charged with executing it, and are authorized to determine its “success.”  The pilot program fails, among other things, to specify the matters for study or set parameters that would measure its necessity and success.  It also omits the study of alternatives– some of which were even accepted by experts of the Interior Ministry – that would accomplish the goal of preventing forgery without the compilation of a massive centralized database (such as “privacy by design” methodologies which reduce the risks of information theft or misuse).

According to the petitioners, the population authority is trying to convince the public to participate in the pilot and argues for the safety of the biometric database. In an era of wikileaks, there is no such thing as a totally safe database. The consequences will be harsh, If and when information will leak from the biometric database.

(BTW, Placa de George Orwell is located in Barcelona. He went to Barcelona in 1936, and hoped to write articles about the Spanish Civil War. )

January 4-7, 2012 - Maui

Papers due June 15, 2011

Additional information about the minitrack and papers presented in previous years may be found at the website of the  social and digital inclusions in networks  minitrack. General information about the conference may be found at the HICSS primary website.

Mini-Track Chairs:

David Yates, Bentley University, dyates@bentley.edu [Primary Contact]
Karine Nahon, University of Washington, karineb@uw.edu

This mini-track calls for papers that study social and digital inclusion in networks at different levels. In the forthcoming conference, we would like to emphasize four areas: (i) connections between off-line divides and on-line divides; (ii) inequalities within and among communities; (iii) information and communication technologies for development; and (iv) inequalities between users with respect to social and digital divides. Possible levels at which to examine such areas include international, national, local, sector, communal, and individual. Both empirical and theoretical papers are invited. Building on the success of this mini-track from the past nine HICSS conferences, we invite submissions to the 2012 mini-track on social networking and communities.

Contributions may explore the following topics, but, by no means are limited to those on this list:

• Conceptualization and theory of inequalities with respect to networks, digital divides, digital spectrum and e-inclusion;
• Indigenous communities and technologies;
• ICT and development;
• Social and political inclusion, including topics related to participation;
• Socio-demographic factors such as gender, age, education, income, ethnic diversity, racial diversity, language diversity, religiosity;
• Social and governmental support – for example, the use of supportive initiatives, policy and applications to bridge gaps, or how society and community impact e-inclusion;
• Access (public, private, etc.), infrastructure factors;
• Use – skills, frequency and time, locus, autonomy of use;
• Affordability of ICTs and services; and
• What do users do online and for what purposes?
• Accessibility focusing on populations with special needs;
• Measurements indices;
• Comparative analysis of policy;
• Comparative cross-country or cross-region research; and
• Country or region specific case studies.

Important Deadlines

Abstracts: Authors may contact Minitrack Chairs for guidance and indication of appropriate content at anytime.

June 15, 2011: Authors submit Full Papers to the Peer Review System, following the Author Instructions found on the HICSS web site. All papers will be submitted in double column publication format and limited to 10 pages including diagrams and references that conform to HICSS standards. Papers undergo a double-blind review.

August 15, 2011: Acceptance/Rejection notices are sent to Authors via the Peer Review System.

September 15, 2011: Authors submit the Final Version of papers following submission instructions on the Peer Review System website

As a result, the IJoC (International Journal of Communication) dedicated a volume to network theory.

Here are the papers presented in that volume (they are fully accessible in the following links):

Prologue to the Special Section: Network Multidimensionality in the Digital Age by Manuel Castells, Peter Monge, Noshir Contractor

Introduction to the Workshop: The Promise of Network Theory by Manuel Castells

A Network Theory of Power by Manuel Castells

Fuzziness of Inclusion/Exclusion in Networks by Karine Nahon

Networks of Power, Degrees of Freedom by Yochai Benkler

Multidimensional Networks and the Dynamics of Sociomateriality: Bringing Technology Inside the Network by Noshir Contractor, Peter Monge, Paul M. Leonardi

The Flip Side of Metcalfe’s Law: Multiple and Growing Costs of Network Exclusion by Rahul Tongia, Ernest J. Wilson III

The Ever Evolving Web: The Power of Networks by Wendy Hall

Networks, Societies, Spheres: Reflections of an Actor-network Theorist by Bruno Latour

This presentation is based on two academic papers:
1. Political Blogs and Content: Homophily in the Guise of Cross-Linking
2. Fifteen Minutes of Fame: The Place of Blogs in the Life Cycle of Viral Political Information

January 4-7, 2012 - Maui

Papers due June 15, 2011

Additional information about the minitrack and papers presented in previous years may be found at the website of the  social networking and communities minitrack. General information about the conference may be found at the HICSS primary website.

Mini-Track Chairs:
Karine Nahon, University of Washington, karineb@uw.edu [Primary Contact]
Caroline Haythornthwaite, University of British Columbia

Following the success of this minitrack from the past nine HICSS conferences, we invite submissions to the 2012 mini-track on social networking and communities.

This minitrack focuses on social networks and their interrelations with communities in the context work, learning, social and/or personal life. At present, there is tremendous research interest in these topics, driven by the fact that these sociological phenomena are changing the way people work, play and socialize, and how they spend their time and money. Accordingly, billions of dollars are being spent by businesses and consumers on these technologies, and the rate of adoption has been phenomenal, while empirical and theoretical work on social and technical design, and economic and social outcomes lag behind.

We would like to attract papers that address issues of online communities of practice, inquiry and interest created in the interest of political, educational, business, social and/or gaming pursuits, and with attention to how online community building and management contribute to success in the digital economy and society. While the focus is primarily online communities, papers are also welcomed that address the interplay between online and offline means of interaction.

We call for empirical and theoretical papers that add to our understanding of the social, political, and economic landscape of communities and social networks at work, school, home, and play. Examples of the possible interdisciplinary topics of interest in these contexts include, but are not limited to the following:

• Social, political and/or economic impact of social media
• Communities as sociological phenomenon in the digital economy
• Community development and community informatics
• Design, development, and user studies of social media
• Online communities of practice, inquiry or interest
• Business models of Second Life
• E-learning: structures, implementations, and practices
• Serious leisure communities online
• Organizational behavior of communities
• Social network studies and analyses of online communities
• Mobile applications, services and use for and by online communities
• Case studies and topologies of online communities
• Case studies and analyses of the rise and fall of social network sites and online communities
• Theoretical models of virtual worlds
• Advertising in online communities and social networks
• Models for managing behavior in online communities
• Behavior in online gaming communities
• Models and cases of synergies and/or conflicts between real and virtual worlds
• Diffusion and adoption of social networking applications and practices
• Development of social networking applications and practices
• Critical perspectives on social media and local and/or virtual community
• Disruptive strategies of virtual worlds

Important Deadlines

Abstracts: Authors may contact Minitrack Chairs for guidance and indication of appropriate content at anytime.

June 15, 2011: Authors submit Full Papers to the Peer Review System, following the Author Instructions found on the HICSS web site. All papers will be submitted in double column publication format and limited to 10 pages including diagrams and references that conform to HICSS standards. Papers undergo a double-blind review.

August 15, 2011: Acceptance/Rejection notices are sent to Authors via the Peer Review System.

September 15, 2011: Authors submit the Final Version of papers following submission instructions on the Peer Review System website

Kevin is trying to assess the relationship between the blogosphere and journalists.
He looked at the A-list blogs by combining two main authority indices of blogs - Karpf's BAI index and The Truth Laid Bear.

His findings: Since 2004 until 2008 there is a steady increase of the coverage of popular political blogs in print media. He also reports on a similar phenomenon that we encountered in the retroV project - a power-law distribution (a skewed distribution) of citations of blogs. In other words, most of the articles in printed newspapers cite a small number of blogs - mainly Huffington post and DailyKos - Wallsten claims for a 80-20 distribution.
His results show that most journalist quote/or cite information from blogs and that one of the main topics in which journalist turn to bloggers to seek information is in election time on topics related to the election. Finally, he showed that liberal blogs are far likely to be cited than conservative blogs. (Frank Bannister raised an important question of whether liberal are cited more because the examined journals were more liberals in their nature).

Additionally, Wikileaks knows the rules of the game with journalists. These hundred thousands classified cables were transferred already a week ago to big news organizations like Der Spiegel in Germany and the Guardian in the U.K.. Der Spigel did not restrain itself and “mistakenly” sold early copies of the German magazine at a newsstand. At the age of the Internet, this opportunity is enough to allow leaking some of the leaks prematurely. However, the real avalanche of the leaking information started with The Guardian, which enabled users without high-level digital skills to slice the data. The Guardian customized maps application (by using Google Fusion tables), which enables investigating and analyzing the classified cables per date and country. The newspaper also allowed the users to download either all the original information or the information with metadata (tags that allow to understand easily the data) that the newspaper itself added. This indicates that the newspaper worked hard for some time in order to make this information more clear and relevant to users.

With such large and comprehensive amounts of data, journalists understand that it is not enough to summarize main events to readers, as they used to do in the past. Actually, they cannot summarize so much data, even if they wanted. Instead, they turn the data accessible and transform the readers from passive to active users that slice data, and share the information with others according to their relevant context. This is exactly the process that turns information from anonymous to viral and known to many.

This affair demonstrates that the Internet has a real ability to shutter the scope of state censorship while strengthening freedom of speech. How does that impact the traditional rules of the games and the conventional checks and balances regarding freedom of speech?  The article, “Freedom of Expression and Imaginary Freedom on the Internet: the Abolishment and Rebirth of Censorship”, examines this topic in-depth and argues that the well-known traditional model of state censorship – that is, state censorship performed by regulatory agents – lost much of its importance because of the Internet. At the same time, the Internet is not free from censorship. Alternative systems of self-regulation regarding freedom of expression appeared. For example, the New-York Times published a selection from the leaking cables while self-censoring some information that they thought is sensitive. While self-censoring appears usually to be very effective, this action of the New-York Times may be regarded as absurd, since every user can download the intact data from so many alternative sites. The deletion of the data by the New York times may act as a boomerang, since the deletions may attract the attention of users to what was deleted and therefore to what is considered “sensitive”. In other words, the deletions may help users to find the information that is sensitive.

The Wikileaks affair has powerful implication to the relationships between states and citizens, and among states. I assume that the new continuous deterrence of uncovering internal communication will cause bureaucrats to be more careful in the way they express themselves internally and externally. It will also cause countries to be more accountable to the expressions and actions of their officials. Countries must internalize the change – the world is becoming more transparent.

Our paper, Fifteen Minutes of Fame: The Place of Blogs in the Life Cycle of Viral Political Information addresses the dynamics of viral information in the blogosphere, and is interested in empirically understanding how blogs play a role in the virality process. More specifically, we developed a new methodology that creates a map of the ‘life cycle’ of blogs posting links to viral information. Our dataset focused on the linking practices of blogs to the most significant viral videos of the 2008 US presidential election. To do so, we gathered data on all blogs (n=9,765) and their posts (n=13,173) linking to 65 of the top US presidential election videos that became viral on the Internet during the period between March 2007 and June 2009. Among other things, our findings illuminated the importance of different types of blogs: elite, top-political, top-general and tail blogs. We also found that while elite and top-general blogs create political information, they drive and sustain the viral process, whereas top-political and tail blogs act as followers in the process. [I will probably write a separated post about our paper].

Below are the papers that will be presented in that conference: