I suppose I could have also focussed on other cyborg representations in sci-fi – notably the depiction of The Borg as they first appeared in Star Trek – as credibly scary space villians. It’s intersting though – as the ratings dived and the idea of the Borg had been quite played out we suddenly get two sexy Borg women – the Borg Queen (who seduces Data by grafting some skin on to his arm…) and Seven of Nine – a Delta Quadrant Barbie doll.

Some interesting answers for the discussion questions. Like yours, many of my answers began, “I am not sure…”

I was especially interested in your answer to Q5 “Do cyborgs really resist the structure of sex/gender, as Haraway claims?” which I blogged on recently:

http://digitalculture-ed.net/sarahp/2009/11/16/do-cyborgs-resist-the-structure-of-sexgender-as-haraway-claims/#comment-76

I reached the same conclusion that you did – cyborgs are more likely to look like sexual fantasies because that is how they are already portrayed in popular culture. Because they appear that way, they WILL appear that way!

Hard to say how that last point about ‘facts’ and ‘assertions’ went down. Watching the video again, I’m horribly conscious of how many ‘assertions as facts’ I made myself. I briefly spoke to the chap who was asking the questions afterwards and he seemed curious at the least…

I just watched your talk and thought it was terrific – showing real curiosity about the mechanics of what is happening in the process of conspiracy theorising. Your ‘blather rinse repeat’ and digital winks seem like really strong analytic frames for future research in this area.

It was really fascinating to hear the questions after your talk as well. Your point about the difference between fact and assertion was well taken, it seemed like?

oh, and your prezi is gorgeous.

It’s a really interesting area – I look forward to seeing the video.

I really like the location of the study in the idea of how to construct a field in the absence of a bounded site – something which highlighted again for me the fuzziness of virtual ethnography, since what you are doing here could almost equally be seen as a form of textual or discourse analysis. Bearing this in mind, I’d have been interested to have seen more of your thoughts on community in the context of conspiracy theory, since it seems here you are exploring the intersections of a series of texts perhaps more than the interactions of individuals? Is this an inevitability, in the context of internet research, where the relationship between text and subject can be so problematic?