1/ In defense of pop culture in intellectual pursuits
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @tabloidarthist view original on Twitter
2/ I presented this paper by @msalganik, @peterdodds, @duncanjwatts (2006) in a doctoral-level methods course on network analysis at UCLA. Authors are highly respected, paper has over a thousand citations:
3/ It would’ve been a disservice to Salganik et al (2006) if slide titles weren’t used for punny references to pop song titles or the music biz:
4/ Similarly, this seemed the only appropriate closing slide:
5/ This wasn’t to be glib, wasn’t done because I didn’t get the Gini coefficient “success inequality” measure or the implications of social influence as a counterintuitive factor shaping cultural markets
6/ I use pop culture in my work because: (1) I take my research seriously, but don’t take myself too seriously; (2) it’s an artifact worthy of analysis; (3) academia need not be bleak and humorless
7/ As a sociology PhD student, I aspire to Salganik et al’s empirical ingenuity and methodological rigor. But, I also watch #VanderpumpRules in my spare time #SorryNotSorry
unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ Many disconcerting things here: 1. That third-party/media reporting may be more effective and trustworthy than university HR or TIX offices; 2. That cautionary whisper networks may have some degree of selection bias on who is or is not informed about whom to avoid;
2/ 3. The use of “x told y person within z amount of time” as proof of the veracity or plausibility of harassment claims (not all cases have this, but those cases are still equally valid); 4. That double-digit victim numbers seems to be critical mass for “university response;”
3/ Dominguez’ repulsive behavior went on for nearly FOUR DECADES (1979-2015)? That’s far too long for those at the top to have been oblivious
**For @CommonApp applicants, admissions decisions may be subject to evaluation of conviction record for felony or misdemeanors in violation of DC statutes including, but not limited to Title 22 § 4, 8A, 8B, 9B, 13, 18, 19A, 22, 27A, 31B, 33, 36, 36A, etc.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @uclaadmission view original on Twitter
1/ I rarely comment on the gun control debate. I support reasonable, effective gun control. Yet, some liberals seem all too happy to dogpile on tribalistic virtue-signalling via backhanded insults to law-abiding gun owners:
2/ Many of these gun owners (my rural family included) also support gun law reform. Lobbing petty insults betrays: (a) dearth of knowledge on guns/current gun law; (b) refusal to see gun ownership as part of a valid cultural identity; (c) rabid desire to dehumanize “those people”
3/ All of these are equally problematic and divisive. So as a Mossberg 500-loving, blue state-residing, liberal Southerner who wants to see legislative reform of gun control, I say to other liberals – stop it