(PDF) Writing for the public

The Information Society An International Journal ISSN: 0197-2243 (Print) 1087-6537 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utis20 Writing for the public Hailley Fargo, Kristina Franklin, Peyton Loomis, Brooke Long-Yarrison, Kristin Newvine & Nicholas J. Rowland To cite this article: Hailley Fargo, Kristina Franklin, Peyton Loomis, Brooke Long-Yarrison, Kristin Newvine & Nicholas J. Rowland (2020) Writing for the public, The Information Society, 36:2, 124-129, DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2019.1711322 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2019.1711322 Published online: 12 Jan 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 84 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=utis20 THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 2020, VOL. 36, NO. 2, 124–129 BOOK REVIEW Writing for the public The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking, by Deborah Lupton. Malden, MA: Polity, 2016. 240 pp. $19.95 £15.24 e17.58 paper. ISBN 9781509500604 (paper), $64.95 £49.60 e57.24 hardback, ISBN 9781509500598 (hardback). The Internet of Things, by Samuel Greengard. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015. 232 pp. $15.95 £11.95 e12.95 paper. ISBN: 9780262527736 (paper). Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked, by Adam Alter. New York: Penguin, 2017, xi þ 354 pp. $17.00 £12.97 e14.95 paper, ISBN 978073522847 (paper), $27.00 £20.61 e23.75 hardback, ISBN 9781594206641 (hardback), $12.99 £9.92 e11.43 e-book. ISBN 9780698402638 (e-book). It is not easy to write for the public. But, as we shall see, (Lewenstein 1992). While this topic of research is pri- that is what the authors set out to do in the texts under marily about scientific communication to the public, examination in this review essay. In The Quantified Self, and, in turn, public perceptions and representations of Lupton (2016) introduces the public to the sociology of science, it also examines public engagement and inter- self-tracking. In The Internet of Things, Greengard (2015) vention into science, among other issues. primes the public on the reality and repercussions of an The Royal Society’s 1985 report, “The Public interconnected world of things. Finally, in Irresistible, Understanding of Science” is usually heralded as the ori- Alter (2017) informs the public about how compulsive gin of this line of thinking. Because “[m]any personal self-tracking and the increasing interconnectedness of decisions, for example about diet, vaccination, personal people and things can result in near inevitable behavioral hygiene or safety at home and at work, would be helped addiction to the devices that track and connect us. by some understanding of the underlying science” and Each book takes a different approach to the task of because “national prosperity depend[s]” on adequate translating scientific evidence for the purpose of public funding for scientific innovation, the Royal Society consumption, but, in the end, none of them quite hits (1985, 6) decided it “should make improving public the mark. Still, in considering the titles together, and understanding of science one of its major activities.” comparing their attempts to engage the public, some- The interventionist tone of the report unintentionally thing can be learned that is not evident in any one book cast the public’s knowledge in terms of a deficit to be but only between them as a group, which elucidates why improved upon, a model that became dominant in this rendering scholarly conversations for public consump- line of thinking and is still influential in some public tion is, at times, nigh impossible. Framed by literature policy circles (Simis et al. 2016). Numerous cases since on the public understanding of science, this review dis- have demonstrated, however, that the deficit model of cusses the pressure scholars face to write for a public the public understanding of science is limited and, with- audience, examines the books under review, and then out irony, has some deficits of its own. For example, concludes with literature from library science on why Moreira’s (2012) case of public intervention in dementia scholarly communication is so challenging to share with trials in the United Kingdom demonstrates that scientific a public audience. knowledge, and the process by which is it produced for Communicating scientific knowledge to the public, public “use,” can – and perhaps should – occasionally be often, but not solely, through the mouthpiece of news challenged directly by members of the public. Scientific media, is a significant research topic in numerous disci- accounts of dementia examine, for example, verified tests plines, especially science and technology studies (STS) of cognitive scores, which, when combined from many where the “public understanding of science” enjoys sus- patients over time, aids in creating generalized know- tained analytical attention (see, for example, the journal ledge about managing dementia. In contrast, personal devoted to the topic, unsurprisingly titled, Public accounts (i.e., pleas or “human interest stories”) operate Understanding of Science). It is important for reflexive according to an alternative dynamic. They communicate scientists to recognize the public nature of the scientific dementia as a lived experience. Loved ones report enterprise (Stephan 2004) and to consider the ability of whether or not the family member is doing well and is the public to understand scientific contributions feeling comfortable in stories that are drawn-up against THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 125 the backdrop of the home. The implicit message is that Still, according to Lepore (2013, n.p.): people in the story simply cannot wait for the next “Writing for the public” is, by now, a fairly round of trials – they need help now. To characterize meaningless thing to say. Everyone who tweets these members of the public as absent of knowledge is “writes for the public.” Lectures are posted online. So unfair; families living with dementia understand it all are papers. Most of what academics produce can be too well, even if it is in their own way. found, by anyone who wants to find it, by Whether or not the authors under review assume this searching Google. deficit model of the public understanding of their science Thus, it is in this tangled web of pressures and incen- is yet to determined; however, that the authors are writ- tives that the authors of The Quantified Self (Lupton ing for the public, and likely feel some pressure to do so, 2016), The Internet of Things (Greengard 2015), and is sufficiently obvious. To be fair, there is a long but Irresistible (Alter 2017) will be read and reviewed. declining tradition of scholars writing for the public, his- torically, as individuals labeled “public intellectuals” (Jacoby 1989). Currently, “we face the rise of a new The quantified self intellectual class,” Jacoby (2000, 52) writes, “using a new scholasticism accessible only to the mandarins, who have Deborah Lupton, at The University of Canberra, is the turned their back on public life and letters.” In a related author of The Quantified Self (2016), a book analyzing note, challenges to the legitimacy of higher education self-tracking practices in western culture. Lupton has appear to be on the rise (Carlson 2019; Grief 2015), aca- coauthored and edited nearly 20 books and has written demic writing and academic publishing are being chal- over 170 journal articles and book chapters with topics lenged on cultural and economic grounds (Camhi 2015; varying broadly across several disciplines, including: soci- Lepore 2013), and efforts to improve the situation, by ology, media, health, communication, and cultural stud- making faculty responsive public audiences, are being ies. Lupton’s key areas of foci include the social and publicized (Cordell 2011; Hardy and Milanese 2016). cultural dimensions of medicine and public health; risk; According to Carlson (2019, n.p.): the body; parenting cultures; digital sociology; food; obesity politics; and emotion. Lupton advocates for the [i]n the past several years, higher education has been use of technology as a means of learning in the class- at the tip of … [journalists’] very sharp pens. College, my peers have said, is bloated, broken, room, and is not shy about this in her book, The unsustainable, failing, irrelevant, obsolete. Quantified Self. At the beginning of the book, Lupton describes her Thus, in academic writing, it follows, “[a]cademic work as a “contemporary view of self-tracking cultures, publishers [now] have a particular obligation to measure analyzed from a critical sociological perspective.” (1) the distance between the university and the public, and Though she does mention the book is about the self- to think about whose work spans it” (Lepore 2013, n.p.). tracking culture, she fails to mention the majority of Academic journals and university presses have, historic- individuals Lupton refers to are a unique sub-group, ally, “not rewarded clarity or beauty or timeliness, and it who have imbued self-tracking practices into all facets of has not made a priority of satisfying readers or earning their everyday lives from eating, drinking, exercising, profits because it was not designed to do any of these sleeping, bodily functions, even sex patterns. This exten- things: It was designed to advance scholarship” (Lepore sive version of self-monitoring, while creating a vivid 2013, n.p.). example of this particular issue in society, is quite obvi- In the conventional account, the antidote to past ously contained within a subculture; a group that accepts incentives that internalize scholarly conversation in the aspects of the dominant culture but are set apart from it walls and halls of the ivory tower is to, once again, in some significant way (Ritzer 2018). address the public. One of the challenges is that few con- Since Lupton’s work focuses on aspects of a small temporary faculty were taught explicitly to write for the percent of the greater population, many topics covered, public (Camhi 2015). In response to these concerns, the including, theoretical perspectives, personal data mean- State University of New York at Stony Brook debuted “a ings, practices, materialisations, and data politics, would program to train faculty members and graduate students be lost on the general populace. Florian Mueller, to become public intellectuals,” and to address a firmly Director, Exertion Games Lab, RMIT University, is embedded, preconceived notion held by academ- quoted on the back of the book saying: “I highly recom- ics, namely: mend it to researchers and practitioners who wish to The question of whether academics should try to gain a comprehensive account of self-tracking practices.” reach a popular audience has been, for decades, a While an engaging read for people with a richer back- nonquestion: Scholars typically assumed there was no ground in this topic, the density of information leaves it way to popularize their work for the general public inaccessible to the general public, a vivid example of the without abandoning their mission as intellectuals difficulty of writing for the public as well as the (Wolf and Kopp 2016, n.p.). academic sphere. 126 BOOK REVIEW With the rapid growth of digital technology and soft- The Internet of Things ware in recent years, the book, just published in 2016, Samuel Greengard is a freelance writer and instructor at has aged prematurely due, in part, to newer versions of the UCLA’s writers program. As an experienced writer technology available to replace those mentioned in the with a long history of writing for companies and busi- book. Another question, then, arises: is there a way to nesses such as Charles Schwab & Co., Intel, and write about technology that does not become quickly Microsoft, he has written hundreds of articles for con- outdated? Unfortunately, Lupton’s attempt to do this, in sumer and trade magazines such as American Way, The Quantified Self, falls flat. America West, Amtrak’s Arrive, Discover, Engineering On the other hand, Lupton does an excellent job at Inc., Industry Week, MSNBC/MSN Online, and reaching out to the academic community at large. For PM Network. example, Petrakaki (2017) praises the book for its ability Greengard authored The Internet of Things published to generate broad questions, bridge theoretical perspec- in MIT’s Essential Knowledge series, which is known for tives, and provide potential avenues for future research having experts write about complex topics for public that spans numerous disciplines. While speaking to the consumption and a global audience. The Internet of broader academic community, Lupton also is able to Things gives the reader a step-by-step history of how explain the phenomenon of self-tracking practices and devices are becoming interconnected, a futuristic view of technology in such a way that is not biased in regard to this interconnectedness, and some commentary on the advocating for or against the technology; it just simply potential misuse of this technology. The manner of his states the facts. book is concise and straightforward which has been Lupton excels at describing the self-tracking practices noted by other reviewers (Olson 2016; Medina 2018). she refers to throughout the book with numerous exam- While Greengard is concise and straightforward in his ples and lengthy details, that leaves the reader with a description of the Internet of Things (IoT), he fails to complete picture of what this self-tracking culture is like, educate his readers who might know little about this but she fails to explain the very basics of the Quantified field of technology. Self Movement, which might leave some readers missing Throughout the book, Greengard is optimistic about crucial components of her reasoning for writing this the impact of the IoT. His technological utopianism car- book. In the same token, she focuses primarily on the ries throughout the book and makes readers (and society self-tracking practices themselves, and leaves just one at large) believe that all their problems can be solved chapter to talk about the most controversial area of self- through the IoT, Greengard (2015, xv) reenforces his tracking practices: big data. The two sections of the book pro-tech side by claiming the IoT can transform the that might have warranted additional exploration were world as we know it: “We will live in automated homes, the section on data politics and the brief segment on the drive smart vehicles on networked roads, shop in highly relationship between race and data consciousness, as interactive stores, and connect to medical and wellness Lauber (2016) notes. The book may also have benefitted products that redefine our basic approach to health.” As from placing this chapter at the beginning of the book, amazing as this sounds, this is not the world we live in, and building off of this idea, because it provides rich and a more informed reader might think Greengard’s context within which the phenomenon is occurring and idealistic outlook on the IoT is extravagant. may have made the book more beneficial for both the Greengard’s writing style affirms his belief in the IoT; public and private sectors. a reader is led to believe that either the IoT creates a As for where The Quantified Self should be placed on utopian society where humans and technology can co- the bookshelf, its most natural neighbor happens to be exist or a dystopian society full of crime. He allocates Greengard’s (2015) Internet of Things, as Lupton quotes more than half of the seven chapters in the book to con- the book several times. It might be in the reader’s best centrate on the benefits of the IoT and how humans can- interest to first read the Internet of Things, which would not live without it. Eventually, as if to redeem himself, give the reader the underlying knowledge that is neces- he goes on to briefly mention the more extreme disad- sary to better comprehend the content in The vantages associated with the IoT in the last two chapters. Quantified Self. This includes extreme measures such as misuse by terro- In the end, Lupton’s lasting message is that technol- rists, criminals, and hackers through means of cyberat- ogy is one of the few real ways for human beings to tacks, cyber-espionage, and fraud. In Greengard’s eyes, understand themselves and their bodies, but, at the same there is no middle ground with the IoT. He even ven- time, neglects to address that human beings are still tures as far as to inform the reader how 3 D printers granted cognitive liberties, such as thoughts, feelings, allowed criminals to bypass legal control by manufactur- and emotions, which are at this point in time, unquanti- ing plastic guns and weapons which can remain fiable. “With that perspective, the human subject is just undetected by metal detectors or other types of security another node on the Internet of Things,” says Jo Aurea devices. This could allow criminals to smuggle weapons M. Imbong (2018, 151), another reviewer. past airports, stadiums, and heavily secured public areas. THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 127 He also describes how drones can be used to commit also received recognized as a Barnes and Noble Book of acts of terrorism by dropping highly targeted bombs. It the Month. is quite obvious that by putting more emphasis on the Alter, a social psychologist on NYU’s marketing fac- advantages of the IoT, along with his reluctance to fully ulty, jumps down the rabbit hole of technology in every- develop the consequences of the IoT, Greengard strug- day life, but not quite as expected. From the title, a gles to be objective and, instead, takes an “technological reader would imagine the book would investigate the deterministic stance” (Olson 2016, 681). Because forces binding mankind to devices. In fact, the “real” title Greengard argues that all aspects of today’s world are of the book can be found in a paragraph description on influenced (and improved) by technology, it provides the back cover: “Welcome to the age of Behavioral the reader with a one-sided, essentially naive view Addiction … ” – a far more accurate description of of technology. Alter’s book. It is broken into three parts titled: (1) For Greengard, the IoT is a money-making venture, What is behavioral addiction and where did it come although, at the same time, is unsure if businesses will from? (2) The ingredients of behavioral addiction (or, collaborate to maximize profits. According to one how to engineer an addictive experience), and (3) The reviewer, Greengard idealizes technology almost as if he future of behavioral addictions (and some solutions). It is selling the idea that one cannot live without it with his is noteworthy that none of them mention technology. It pro-tech outlook (Olson 2016). Instead of educating the is only seen as a facilitator and intensifier of a deep mal- reader on the different components of science and tech- ady of our times – behavioral addiction. nology that make up the IoT, Greengard shares examples Technology is portrayed in each part as a distraction of the IoT already present in businesses such as Apple, that entices students to lose their way in college, or a Netflix, Motorola, AT&T, and Amazon as well as vehicle for attention capture that keeps the public tuned apps such as Myfitness-Pal, Metromile, WeMo, into the next episode of a serial. However, it is not the and DocScanner. technology itself that is the culprit, but the activities We cannot fail to acknowledge that this book might enacted through it. Therefore “we need to understand how, why, and when people first develop and then do a disservice to those who are not critically “plugged escape behavioral addictions” (Alter 2017, 317). into” technology. A reader who only reads The Internet Alter spends the first section of the book exploring of Things might be led to believe in a perfect world the historical and psychological background of behavioral where “ … the lines between human and machine will addiction, examining everything from smartphone screen continue to blur” (Greengard 2015, 26). One might ques- time to World of Warcraft – said to be the first of tion if Greengard succeeds in educating the public on addictive online games – to the heroin epidemics how technology in our world works. Can readers gain a amongst U.S. soldiers during the Vietnam War. He con- profound knowledge of technological aspects of the IoT? cludes the section with the observation that there’s a cer- Greengard composed this book in such a way that in tain biological urge behind society’s growing addiction. order to fully understand its ideas you would need to He also considers the long-running debate as to whether first acquire previous knowledge in the technology field. addiction is a disease or a choice, including the addition Cameron (2016, 87) claims that reading The Internet of of substance and behavioral to the 5th Edition of the Things “feels a little like reading Wikipedia;” this is pos- DSM: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental sibly due to the way that Greengard is unenthusiastically Disorders published in 2013. In the second section, Alter telling and not teaching his reader the technological examines example after example of the ingredients of aspects of this emergent world of the future. Greengard behavioral addiction, using real life examples like Netflix primarily focused on showing off what the IoT (com- binge watching, which very many people have fallen vic- mercially) can do instead of focusing on how he can tim to at one point in their lives. Alter presents very engage his readers into really understanding the roots many examples of activities that humans engage in and implications of the IoT. nearly every day in modern society, including email, social media, entertainment streaming services, video games, and so on. Each contains their own addictive Irresistible qualities, something Alter flagged in the opening pages Adam Alter’s (2017) Irresistible: The Rise of Addictive of the book: Technology and the Business of Keeping Us Hooked is a follow-up to his 2013 Drunk tank pink: And other unex- Millions of recovering alcoholics manage to avoid bars altogether, but recovering Internet addicts are pected forces that shape how we think, feel, and behave. forced to use email. You can’t apply for a travel visa In the intervening period between these two books, or a job, or begin working, without email address. Alter’s experience writing for the public grew, as he fre- Fewer and fewer modern jobs allow you to avoid quently wrote for New York Times, Washington Post, using computers and smartphones. Addictive tech is and other such publications. His first work, Drunk Tank part of the mainstream in a way that addictive Pink (Alter 2013) is a New York Times best seller and substances never will be (Alter 2017, 9) 128 BOOK REVIEW In his final section, Alter presents possibilities for perspective and interpretations” (ACRL (Association of decreasing the level of behavioral addiction the people College and Research Libraries) 2016, 8). The authors of faces in their daily lives. Changing phrases such as “I this review would like to emphasize “sustained” within can’t” to “I don’t” can help to avoid negative behavior. It the quoted section. Lupton, Greengard, and Alter are is scientifically proven that people can design their envir- providing readers with a snapshot of the conversation, onment to foster better control. According to Alter but do not expect their readers to sustain the conversa- (2017, 291), “If you design your environment wisely, tion beyond the pages of their book. These books are a you’ll stand a better chance of avoiding harmful behav- window into the scholarly conversations but provide no ioral addiction.” Alter is optimistic about our ability to instructions on how to enter and add to this conversa- do so. Brewer (2018) disagrees with Alter’s main recom- tion. By attempting to provide an “inclusive” look into mendation; as a social psychologist himself, Brewer the topics, the experts downplay the fact that conversa- advises readers to replace negative behaviors with more tions around self-tracking, the IoT, and behavioral addic- positive ones as a method of dealing with any associ- tion to technology have been discussed for decades. If a ated addiction. reader only reads one of these books, they are missing Alter walks the tightrope of a producing a scholarly out on the work that has come before and will come book while keeping a public angle, evident, for example, after Lupton, Greengard, and Alter. In reading only one in his mixed references – everything from the New York of these books, the reader will receive only one perspec- Times to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. tive on this topic and therefore, is unable to be critical As reviewer Hill (2017, 99) remarks, the book is “[a]n of the experts because they do not know the other or excellent offering for those interested in technology, alternative perspectives. especially those grappling with the topic themselves.” Readers should review the bibliographies from each This book is fit for anyone, whether they possess previ- book and ask: “how many of these resources are avail- ous knowledge on the subject or not. As reviewer able to the public?” Between paywalls and requisite Konkel claims (2017), Alter’s “book is an engrossing – knowledge, how can any reader gain access to the foun- albeit alarming – read that will make you want to chuck dational work supporting these books under review? your smartphone out the window.” If you have a smart- Without access to the foundational work, how can the phone, use the Internet, or are living in the 21st century reader critically assess each book? then this book will connect with your life, a fact that While the task of communicating scientific knowledge makes Alter’s chief arguments even harder to deny. to the public is necessary, it will require experts writing the books to improve the ways they help to bring the public into the conversation. Instead of believing that Conclusion they have to convey a whole topic in just one volume, While each of the authors attempts to inform the public experts should consider new ways to start the conversa- on an aspect of technology, each book falters in that tion with the public and encourage their readers to join endeavor. When writing for the public, an assumption is the conversation themselves. Scientific knowledge can be made that the one singular book will be enough for the understood by the public, but experts need to believe reader to become informed and, in some cases, to that the public can and will join the conversation. become a critic. In reality, that is all but an insurmount- able goal; after all, every conversation, scholarly or not, References is informed from the conversations that came before it. Within the field of library and information science ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries). 2016. (LIS), librarians work to help learners understand how Framework for information literacy for higher education. Accessed February 25, 2019. http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org. information is created, disseminated, and valued in soci- acrl/files/content/issues/infolit/Framework_ILHE.pdf. ety. One guiding document for academic librarians is the Alter, A. L. 2013. Drunk tank pink: And other unexpected forces Association of College and Research Libraries’ (ACRL that shape how we think, feel, and behave. New York: Penguin (Association of College and Research Libraries) 2016) Press. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Alter, A. L. 2017. Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked. New York: Penguin Press. Education. This framework proposes six concepts that Brewer, J. 2018. Review of How your smartphone was engineered to can be used to think about information and teach stu- outsmart you, by A. Alter (Penguin Press). The American dents information literacy skills. One of the frames, Journal of Psychology 131 (4):506–10. doi: 10.5406/amerjpsyc. “Scholarship as Conversation” helps to understand why 131.4.0506. Lupton, Greengard, and Alter ultimately came up short. Cameron, N. 2016. A tangled web. Issues in Science and Technology 32 (3):87–9. Within the “Scholarship as Conversation” frame, Camhi, J. 2015. Professor, your writing could use some help. The “Communities of scholars, researchers, or professionals Chronicle of Higher Education, October 26. Accessed February engage in sustained discourse with new insights and dis- 25, 2019. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Professor-Your- coveries occurring over time as a result of varied Writing-Could/233902. THE INFORMATION SOCIETY 129 Carlson, S. 2019. What higher ed can learn from the newspaper Simis, M. J., H. Madden, M. A. Cacciatore, and S. K. Yeo. 2016. industry. The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 19. The lure of rationality: Why does the deficit model persist in Accessed February 25, 2019. https://www.chronicle.com/article/ science communication? Public Understanding of Science 25 (4): What-Higher-Ed-Can-Learn-From/245723. 400–14. doi: 10.1177/0963662516629749. Cordell, R. 2011. Writing in public (in the classroom). The Stephan, P. E. 2004. Robert K. Merton’s perspective on priority Chronicle of Higher Education, September 26. Accessed February and the provision of the public good knowledge. Scientometrics 25, 2019. http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/writing-in- 60 (1):81–87. doi: 10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027311.17226.70. public-in-the-classroom/36190. Wolf, N., and S. Kopp. 2016. Should academics talk to Katie Greengard, S. 2015. The Internet of Things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Couric? The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 17. Press. Accessed February 25, 2019. https://www.chronicle.com/article/ Greif, M. 2015. What’s wrong with public intellectuals? The Should-Academics-Talk-to-Katie/235341. Chronicle of Higher Education, February 13. Accessed February 25, 2019. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Whats-Wrong-With- Hailley Fargo Public/189921. http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2316-502X Hardy, S. M., and M. Milanese. 2016. Teaching students to be pub- lic intellectuals. The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 29. University Library, Pennsylvania Accessed February 25, 2019. http://www.chronicle.com/article/ State University, State College, Pennsylvania, USA Teaching-Students-to-Be-Public/236944. Hill, R. 2017. Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the Kristina Franklin business of keeping us hooked. Library Journal 142 (2):99. Division of Education, Human Development, and Social Imbong, J. A. M. 2018. Review of The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking, by D. Lupton (Polity Press). Mobile Media & Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, Communication 7 (1):151–2. doi: 10.1177/2050157918804400a. Pennsylvania, USA Jacoby, R. 1989. The last intellectuals: American culture in the age of academe. New York: Noonday Press. doi: 10.2307/40249923. Peyton Loomis Jacoby, R. 2000. Intellectuals and their discontents. The Hedgehog Division of Education, Human Development, and Social Review 2 (3):36–52. Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, Konkel, L. 2017. Review of Irresistible: The rise of addictive technol- ogy and the business of keeping us hooked, by A. Alter (Penguin Pennsylvania, USA Press). Scientific American Mind 28 (3):70. Lauber, J. R. 2016. Review of The quantified self: A sociology of self- Brooke Long-Yarrison tracking, by D. Lupton (Polity Press). Choice 54 (3):392–93. Division of Education, Human Development, and Social Lepore, J. 2013. The new economy of letters. The Chronicle of Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, Higher Education, September 3. Accessed February 25, 2019. http://www.chronicle.com/article/The-New-Economy-of-Letters/ Pennsylvania, USA 141291. Lewenstein, B. V. 1992. The meaning of “public understanding of Kristin Newvine science” in the United States after World War II. Public Division of Education, Human Development, and Social Understanding of Science 1 (1):45–68. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/1/ Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, 1/009. Lupton, D. 2016. The quantified self: A sociology of self-tracking. Pennsylvania, USA Cambridge, UK: Polity. Medina, M. 2018. The Internet of Things. European Journal of Nicholas J. Rowland Communication 33 (3):344–346. doi: 10.1177/0267323118775774. http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2917-578X Moreira, T. 2012. Health care standards and the politics of singu- Division of Education, Human Development, and Social larities: Shifting in and out of context. Science, Technology, & Human Values 37 (4):307–31. doi: 10.1177/0162243911414921. Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, Olson, N. 2016. The Internet of Things. New Media & Society 18 Pennsylvania, USA (4):680–682. doi: 10.1177/1461444815621893a. Petrakaki, D. 2017. Review of The quantified self: A sociology of Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence, Pennsylvania self-tracking, by D. Lupton (Polity Press). Sociology of Health & State University, State College, Pennsylvania, USA Illness 39 (8):1574–575. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12495.

Ritzer, G. 2018. Introduction to sociology. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Royal Society. 1985. The public understanding of science. London: ß 2020 Hailley Fargo, Kristina Franklin, Peyton Loomis, Brooke The Royal Society. Accessed February 22, 2019. https://royalsoci- Long-Yarrison, Kristin Newvine, and Nicholas J. Rowland ety.org/topics-policy/publications/1985/public-understanding- https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2019.1711322 science/.