linguistlist.org>
Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karenlinguistlist.org>
mail.utexas.edu>Re: Linguist 12.1446 Hi All, Doug Whalen's concise summary appears to have led to a little confusion about the ways in which the participants at the SALSA colloquium concluded that web- publishing is different from paper-publishing. I think I might be able to clarify things by adding a little detail. Web-publishing is different from paper-based publishing in at least three significant ways: 1. Paper-based publications are typically distributed in a substantially more restricted manner than web-based ones. In principle, a web-based publication can be accessed from anywhere with phone-service, and can be 'distributed' much more rapidly than the time it takes for a paper-based publication. E.g. I am writing this email from Pucallpa, a jungle town in Peru, where I can readily access any web-based publication I want (at 128 kbps!). I cannot, however, access *any* paper-based publications in anthropology or linguistics. Ethically, this kind of availablility effects a 'phase transition' in the way information can circulate. Web-based publications of an anthropological or linguistic nature cannot achieve the rapid oblivion and effective secretiveness of a tome lodged on a musty library shelf. In the organization and execution of the AILLA project (www.ailla.org), for example, we are acutely aware that the web-based nature of the archive means that we can be held accountable by indigenous peoples for materials we archive with an ease that would have been unimaginable prior to the advent of the web. Similarly, the representations of languages or societies that we archive are much more readily available to consumers of information, meaning that, for example, negative representations (and positive ones also!) can circulate with considerably greater ease. 2. Paper-based publication allows for reproduction of text and still-images (although this tends to be expensive). Web-based publication allows for the publication of audio, video, and the substantially easier publication of images. The ethical considerations of audio, images, and video are quite different from that of text alone. The human voice frequently invokes a sense of proprietariness on the part of the speaker that a textualized version frequently does not. This even more the case with video. Moreover, anonymity can be easily preserved in a text, but becomes increasingly difficult for audio and video. Similarly, textual representations allow for kinds of 'editing' that can be important in making representations more acceptable for circulation. The 'representational faithfulness' of audio and video can raise problems by making the editing of embarrassing or even incriminating material more difficult. 3. Related to the above two points, but somewhat distinct, is the ease with which one can make perfect copies of digital files which can then be easily distributed on a large scale. Similarly, digital files can be altered and reworked in ways that produce files of quality equal to the original. This raises serious ethical issues with respect to the intellectual property rights of the people whose voices and images are recorded. I think these properties of web-based publication will always distinguish it quite markedly from paper-based publication. I hope this helps. -Lev Michael Department of Anthropology and The Archive of the Indigenous Languages of Latin America www.ailla.org > >* "Publishing" on the web is different from publishing on paper. It > >has different consequences for the authors of the texts and should > >be treated differently. > > > This is true today, but by the end of the decade or sooner it > wouldn't be true. Building an ethical system upon this first and > prime point is setting it up for collapse. All publishing is not > equal, but the grand distinction between web and paper will erode > quickly. > -- > > --kk >Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue