7/27/2019 Annotated Bibliography Assignment.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/annotated-bibliography-assignmentpdf 1/2

 !""#$!$%& ()(

!"#$%& () *#+,%- #.% #/ 0#.$ %#%12 -3#$4 /#$ %&4 $4-41$3& *1*4$5 6.4 7$+8109 ((:79

<0 ((=>> *5?59 @+1 A1B1+C

#*%+*)%,

D- E4F@4 <44, 8+-3.--+,G +, 321--9 1 3$.3+12 *1$% #/ E$+%+,G 4//43%+@4 $4-41$3& *1*4$- +-%&4 1<+2+%0 %# -%10 #$G1,+H485 D, 1,,#%1%48 <+<2+#G$1*&0 +- #,4 %##2 ?1,0 $4-41$3&4$-

.-4 %# B44* %&4+$ <+<2+#G$1*&+3 +,/#$?1%+#,9 I.#%4-9 *1$1*&$1-4-9 -.??1$+4-9 1,81,120-4- +, #,4 *2134 /#$ 21%4$ $4/4$4,345 "&+24 1 E#$B- 3+%48 *1G4 8#3.?4,%- 122 #/

%&4 -#.$34- !"#$!%%& "(#)*  +, 0#.$ /+,12 *1*4$9 1, 1,,#%1%48 <+<2+#G$1*&0 #$G1,+H4-

-#.$34 ?1%4$+12 0#. 1$4 "+,-(*).(,/ 1- 0#. ?#@4 %&$#.G& 0#.$ $4-41$3& *$#34--5 J&4,9

E&4, 0#. 1$4 $4180 %# <4G+, .-+,G 1,8 3+%+,G -#.$34 ?1%4$+12 +, 0#.$ *1*4$9 ?.3& #/

%&4 E#$B &1- 12$4180 <44, 8#,4K

&)+%-$)#".

J# -.**#$% 0#.$ $4-41$3& /#$ 4--10 LM9 0#. E+22 3$1/% 1, 1,,#%1%48 <+<2+#G$1*&0 /#$ /0

12/30 345 3678923 0#. 1$4 3#,-+84$+,G .-+,G /#$ 0#.$ *1*4$5 N#.$ 1,,#%1%48<+<2+#G$1*&0 -&#.28 +,32.84=

(C D,abstract  !$#.G&20 ())- (>) E#$8-C 1% %&4 %#* #/ %&4 8#3.?4,%  %&1%

4P*21+,- 0#.$ +,%4$4-% +, %&4 %#*+39 -B4%3&4- 0#.$ ?1Q#$ $4-41$3& I.4-%+#,-9 1,8

84/+,4- %&4 -3#*4 #/ 0#.$ +,@4-%+G1%+#,5RC D 3#?*24%49 ?@!A30B12 2C08B /#$ 413& -#.$34 0#. 1$4 3#,-+84$+,G5 N#. E+22 <4

1<24 %# %$1,-/4$ %&4-4 4,%$+4- 8+$43%20 %# 0#.$ "#$B- S+%48 *1G4 +/ 0#. 4,8 .*.-+,G %&4 -#.$34- /#$ 0#.$ *1*4$5

MC D, /CC60/046C 6D /E670  FGHAIHH ;68J3 /#$ 413& -#.$34 0#. *$#@+845 A#?4

%&+,G- %# +,32.84=

15 T,/#$?1%+#, 1<#.% %&4 /70>68K 4C02CJ2J /7J42C92K /CJ 96C0250  #/ %&4

E#$B !E&# +- E$+%+,GU J# E&#? 1$4 %&40 E$+%+,GU J# E&1% -+%.1%+#, 8#4-%&4 E#$B -44? %# <4 $4-*#,8+,GU "&1% 1%%+%.84 8#4- %&4 1.%&#$ -44? %#

&1@4 1<#.% %&4 %#*+3UC

<5 T,/#$?1%+#, 1<#.% %&4 6:28/11 <78<632 /CJ C/0782 #/ %&4 E#$B !E&1% +-

%&4 3#,%4,% #/ %&4 -#.$34U "&1% 1$G.?4,% +- <4+,G ?184U V#E +- %&1% 

1$G.?4,% -.**#$%48UC

35   L64C03 6D 96CC29046C /CJ J2</80782 <4%E44, %&4 -#.$34 1,8 #%&4$

-#.$34- 0#.F@4 2#31%485 !6#4- %&4 -#.$34 43&# %&4 321+?- ?184 <0

#%&4$-U 6#4- +% 188 1,#%&4$ 8+?4,-+#, %# %&4 3#,@4$-1%+#,U V#E +- %&4

-#.$34 -+?+21$ %# #$ 8+//4$4,% /$#? %&4 #%&4$ -#.$34- 0#.F@4 2#31%48UC

85 S#??4,%- #, %&4 6:28/11 M7/140B 68 732D71C233 #/ %&4 -#.$34 +, $421%+#,

%# 0#.$ #E, 1$G.?4,%5WWX#%4= J&4 1,,#%1%+#, -&#.28 <4 *$+?1$+20 +, 0#.$ #E, E#$8-5 N#. ?10 +,32.84

$424@1,% I.#%4- %&1% -44? *1$%+3.21$20 ?4?#$1<24 #$ .-4/.29 <.% <4 -.$4 %# /$1?4 %&#-4

I.#%4- E+%& 0#.$ #E, E#$8- 1,8 1,120-+-5 Y4 -.$4 %# +,32.84 *1$4,%&4%+312 3+%1%+#,-

E+%& *1G4 ,.?<4$- /#$ 1,0 I.#%4- #$ *1$1*&$1-4- 0#. +,32.845

7/27/2019 Annotated Bibliography Assignment.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/annotated-bibliography-assignmentpdf 2/2

./N<12 !CC60/046C3

Albrecht, Steffen. “Whose Voice is Heard in Online Deliberation? A Study of Participation and

Representation in Political Debates on the Internet.”  Information, Communication & Society 

9.1 (2006): 62-82. Print.

In this article, Albrecht (a Ph.D. candidate at Hamburg University of Technology in

Hamburg, Germany) reassesses the extent to which the Internet encourages participation

from groups often underrepresented in offline political discourse. Albrecht illustrates

obstacles to online deliberative participation by offering a case study of an online debate

 between 538 registered users in the city of Hamburg. Results suggested that the Internet

might encourage deliberative participation among young people, while having the opposite

effect for persons over the age of 55 (72). Results also showed a much smaller number of

female participants than anticipated (74). While Albrecht’s review of previous research

 paints a gloomy portrait of the Internet being able to function as a deliberative space any

more than offline political arenas, his actual case study suggests that the Internet may offer

some hope for online deliberation—with, perhaps, some improvements on design. Thisarticle should be useful for providing an example of how I might approach my own study of

 political engagement in social networking spaces, as Albrecht’s case study provides valuable

insight into the advantages and limitations of online political deliberation. I would imagine,

however, that the study might yield different results if conducted within other populations.

Gajjala, Radhika. Cyber Selves: Feminist Ethnographies of South Asian Women. Walnut Creek, CA:

AltaMira Press, 2004. Print.

This book is an ethnographic and feminist examination of the formation of South Asian

cybercommunities. Deeply rooted in theories of postcolonialism, gender politics, and

technology, Gajjala explores notions of “cyborg diaspora” in cyberspace and its impact on

community formation. Most interesting for my purposes is Gajjala’s discussion of the

tensions between access and empowerment, as well as power relationships between those

with access to technology and those without. Gajjala acknowledges that “there are

hierarchies of power embedded in the very construction and design of Internet culture,” but

argues that “there is still a potential for using it in ways that might subvert these hierarchies

and foster dialogue and action on various unexpected fronts, in unpredictable ways” (93).

Yet, according to Gajjala, this empowerment requires women living in poverty and their

advocates to “negotiate and dialogue with the powerful in the North from positions of lesser

 power” (93). Additionally, Gajjala notes the problematic nature of a global culture that

 privileges Western discursive practices, arguing that “[n]o woman of the Third World has the

luxury of not choosing to be westernized if she aspires to be heard, or even simply to achieve

a level of material freedom, comfort, and luxury within global structures of power” (87).Gajjala’s claims may complicate Hauser’s theory of vernacular rhetoric by pointing out that

“vernacular” expression must first mimic aspects of the dominant culture in order to create a

speaking space in the public sphere. Thus, this source points toward some important cautions

and limitations that I must consider when thinking about the Web as an empowering space

for women, as Gajjala’s study shows that the Web may only be an empowering space for

certain women – in this case, those who have access to technology and who are able to

conform to Western standards.