Open Password – Monday July 26, 2021
#952
Libraries. Guide to the future – Simon-Verlag for library knowledge – Repositories – Open Access – Publishers and authors – Academia – Andreas Dohmen – Digital transformation – Conventionalism – Willi Bredemeier – Cisco – Transfer literature – Review culture – Industry 4.0 – Disruptors – Digital companies – Tax minimization – Zeitgeist – Roland Berger – P4 Medicine – Lars Jäger – Yuval Noah Hariri – Data Protection – GDPR – Cybersecurity – Sustainability – Germany and Digitalization – EU – USA – China – AI – Engineering and Digital Innovation – Robotics – EU Index for the Digital Economy and Society – City and country – Fiber optic connections – SMEs – Authorities and citizens – Health services – FAZ – Implementation problem – Hybrid publications – German Bishops’ Conference – Digital transformation – MDG trend monitor – Religious communication – Allensbach Institute for Demoscopy – Sinus market and social research – Religiousness – Ecclesiastical Communication – Secular target groups – Age groups – Digitalization gap
I
Libraries. Guide to the future. Projects and examples: Simon-Verlag is planning
a chat group via open access and other formats – By Elisabeth Simon
II.
Cover story: Andreas Dohmen: How digitally do we want to live?
Firmly anchored in the mainstream conventionalism of the Federal Republic – By Willi Bredemeier
III. German Bishops’ Conference: Religious communication requires cross-media offerings
Libraries. Guide to the future
Simon-Verlag is planning a chat group
via open access and other formats
Regarding the decision of the Simon publishing house, on the one hand, the print work “Libraries. Guide to the future. Projects and Examples” as a reading book (without footnotes), and on the other hand to make all texts and additional contributions plus footnotes available in two repositories, there has been correspondence with authors. The publisher Elisabeth Simon wrote, among other things:
Dear Mr.
Your footnotes were very good, as were the footnotes of the other authors of this book. But the difference between print work and open access is the handling of these footnotes.
In the print version, the reader would have to manually type the links into their browser (including all the pre-programmed errors), whereas in the open access version they can access them directly. This means that the open access copy can be used directly digitally. Another digital form, such as that found in e-books or PDFs published online, represents an interim solution: although it is digital with many of the implied advantages, it usually does not offer the use option of the direct “clickable” link.
In addition, all changes to the text can be made, both in print and open access, but in both cases the entire text needs to be rewritten. In Academia, a distribution point for OA documents, a fairly lively debate has broken out about these changes and the new Open Access format. This showed us that we don’t have to deal with the problem alone and gain experience.
We continue to notice that digitalization brings with it changes that are more far-reaching than originally thought. We will now set up a chat group with the publisher and use it to network librarians and scientists who will tell us about such problems or the advantages of this development. This can only be useful for the further direction of publishing work.
I would then also get in touch with you and my colleagues at the library, because it would be good if we could gain colleagues here, regardless of their opinions.
Best regards, Elisabeth Simon
Andreas Dohmen: How digitally do we want to live?
anchored in the mainstream conventionalism of the Federal Republic
By Willi Bredemeier
Andreas Dohmen, How digital do we want to live? – The most important decision for our future, Ostfildern 2019
The author, who was, among other things, managing director at Cisco, addresses the questions: “How digitally do we actually want to live… and do we have any chance of influencing the rapid development that is overwhelming many people?” This is his priority It is all about “showing connections between the various topics and explaining the essential terms in a simple and understandable way”. Dohmen admits that a separate book could be written about the individual questions he deals with, so he helps himself by “repeatedly pointing out, in my opinion, very good literature for further information” ( page 11 ).
This means that his publication belongs to the genre of transfer literature, which is less about presenting new findings and expanding the frontiers of our knowledge, but rather about conveying the state of knowledge in a sub-area as comprehensively and understandably as possible to interested readers who are not subject-specifically biased. Unfortunately, there is no review or review culture for transfer literature, and therefore there is no discussion about what expectations should realistically be placed on works in this area. Below we look at the book from two perspectives, based on modest and then higher expectations.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Modest expectations: comprehensibility, instructive explanations, a comprehensive structure for classifying news snippets.
__________________________________________________________________________________
If Dohmen wants to limit himself to making a reader who consumes a lot of news aware of connections and to offer a comprehensive structure on digitization issues in which he can classify his news snippets, then he has succeeded in his work. The author also knows how to explain the essential terms and the associated connections, including existing challenges, in a simple, understandable and entertaining and instructive way, and presumably to achieve an insightful effect on some readers. The following examples may show this:
- When defining “Industry 4.0”, the author focuses primarily on the enormous opportunities offered by artificial intelligence in terms of personalization: “The consumer is – if he wants – part of the manufacturing chain of a product from design to production” (48).
- Dohmen describes the advantages of disruptors and other digital companies as follows: “Firstly, digital companies operate with a completely different cost structure, because they require far fewer personnel and other capital-intensive investments to operate the business model. Secondly, they have much greater flexibility because they have little or no consideration for many things such as works councils, production facilities, etc. Furthermore, they often work with tax-minimized models, which larger traditional companies also do, but the scale is completely different. Here, too, the nearest tax haven or the attractive offer of an EU country is just a mouse click away and, in contrast to companies in the analog world, digital companies can move their data etc. there virtually overnight. And finally, these companies are increasingly and excellently reflecting the spirit of the times: for example, for many young people the car no longer represents the same value or status symbol as it still does for many people of the older generation. “Car sharing” is the magic word” (91).
- The so-called “P4 medicine” by the management consultancy Roland Berger is described by the author as follows: “Treatments “become” predictive (predictive through data analysis and AI), preventative (preventive through the analyzes and a view of the complete health picture), personalized (your personal tablet or medicine, based on your data – from classic health data to genetic analyses, printed by the 3D printer in your pharmacy or by an online mail order company like DocMorris) and participatory (the patient becomes much more involved Treatment or health process included because he has an overview of the data and its changes). This makes people a much more equal partner for doctors, and at the same time opens them up to new medical analyses, offers and services.”
In transfer literature it must also be permitted and it may be desirable to show humor and to work with smileys from time to time.
Andreas Dohmen
__________________________________________________________________________________
Higher expectations: firmly based on the Federal Republic and anchored in conventional positions.
__________________________________________________________________________________
With our second look at Dohmen’s book, let’s assume higher standards. Here we were treated to authors like Jäger and Hariri, who publish in Open Password or have been reviewed there.
Dohmen was probably aware of the danger that a comprehensive treatment of the topic of “digitalization” could lead to superficial discussions. He succumbed to this danger, for example, on the topic of “data protection” when he spoke almost exclusively of the positive effects of the General Data Protection Regulation and was probably never aware of the actual danger of the GDPR, namely the restriction of our publication culture and the discouragement of our civil society. From the author’s point of view, it is only a matter of finding a “balance between the protection of the consumer and the interests of companies” (192) , so that he does not have the interests of civil society in mind with this limitation to the economic. When the author comes to two demands of his own in the chapter “Data protection and cybersecurity”, one of them is: “ Anchor data protection as a “compulsory subject” in school ” (197). Is data protection not just one aspect that needs to be taken into account in digitalization projects, but rather a “mandatory subject”? Here Dohmen even goes beyond the positions of our data protection radicals in our republic, which is already plagued by excessive data protection concerns.
Basically, it is very important to show connections between the individual areas and aspects of digitalization and Dohmen clearly points this out when considering his career choice: “The worlds are growing together, and the interfaces are where the challenge lies, especially in a digitalized world progress” (63). However, it is not enough to put these topics side by side in one book. Otherwise, the reader will learn little more when it comes to the topic of “digitalization and sustainability” than that our planet’s resources are limited and the design of further digitalization steps should be shaped by concern for sustainability. If you wanted more, you would have to deal intensively with the interactions between the individual areas of digitalization and here Dohmen is dependent on the state of discussion, preferably in the Federal Republic. “Transfer literature” could also go so far as to point to “holes” in the status of the discussions that it otherwise reflects.
Dohmen tries to avoid the danger of superficial representations by focusing firmly on the state of the debate in the Federal Republic, as far as it reflects the “mainstream”. The book is firmly anchored in a conventionalism, in which what is currently agreed upon by the public and the Federal Republic is reproduced with approval. Since there is no agreement in our republic about how digitally we want to live, he can only point to the urgency of his question in the book title (“How digitally do we want to live?”). In addition, Dohmen relies heavily on official papers, such as the results of commissions, rather than discussing the views of individual authors. This can be seen critically, since official papers are often the result of a negotiation process that only leads to a “consensus” through linguistic compromises and can only be truly understood if the previous negotiation process is discussed.
Let’s take the topic “Germany and digitalization” as an example. Germany should work closely with the other EU countries. “Europe has a historic opportunity and responsibility to develop an alternative concept and thereby free ourselves – at least in crucial parts – from digital dependence on the USA and prevent dependence on China from developing in the first place. “Sustainable” and “ethical” content (especially when it comes to AI) could make a serious difference (“AI made in Europe – Smiley)” (226). Germany’s special opportunity lies in combining “excellent engineering with digital innovation ” (90). This opportunity has at least led to Germany taking a leading position in robotics.
Otherwise, the German position when it comes to “digitalization” is rather poor, for example according to the “EU Index for the Digital Economy and Society”, where the Germans only occupy a meager twelfth place. Dohmen sees the reasons
- “the digital divide between urban and rural areas in terms of broadband access;
- the low proportion of fiber optic connections (directly into the house);
- the expandable acceptance and use of digital opportunities by SMEs;
- the weak online interaction between authorities and citizens (26th place out of 28) due to a lack of digitized products and services from the authorities;
- the weak use of digital health services (26th place!)” (103).
The author concludes: “There is no lack of analysis or even committees… There are more or less the right and definitely good things in there. … The problem is: For years it worked like that somehow, because the world was analogue and only in the last 10 – 15 years has it become more digital every year” (106). Here’s a quote from the FAZ from 2008: “When it comes to digitalization, Germany primarily has an implementation problem. Whether broadband infrastructure, the digital pact for schools, the development of a uniform citizen portal for government services or a strategy for artificial intelligence (AI): the projects must be put into practice quickly and decisively” ( 114 ). The author himself says: “ So far we have been the announcement world champions in many areas of digitalization. What we need is a “digital master plan 2040” that is provided with clear, measurable milestones as part of an overarching vision of Germany 2040 and whose implementation is reported publicly at regular intervals. Because the status quo is managed too much, and we citizens are (still) being deceived by the fact that things are somehow “working”” ( 131 ).
Yes and, one might ask at this point. Which politician, regardless of his background, would disagree with this and perhaps say something a little less polished himself? Should we be satisfied with this in the transfer literature? Or should we insist on paying attention to international authors so that the world export champion does not become an intellectual closed shop? And describe the course of contentious discourses instead of contenting yourself with reporting the results of committee meetings?
Personally, I would like to see transfer literature that partly focuses on promising outsiders, who reject the mainstream and don’t spend their time sitting on commissions. One could also consider promoting a hybrid publishing culture in which the tasks of acquiring knowledge and disseminating new findings to a broader public are no longer separated. Perhaps a demand would develop if scientists were offered a basic course in comprehensible writing for a broader public if they have not already taught themselves.
.
German Bishops’ Conference
Religious communication requires cross-media offerings
(German Bishops’ Conference) The digital transformation is also having a drastic impact on church media work. The recently published MDG Trend Monitor – Religious Communication 2020/21 shows how and which media with religious and church topics are currently used, which provides information about Catholics’ attitudes towards the church, religion and faith, their media use, sources of information and interests.
The MDG Trend Monitor is a study that has been carried out for the fourth time since 1999. In the summer of 2020, 1,690 Catholics aged 14 and over were surveyed for the new edition. The study was carried out by the Institute for Demoscopy Allensbach and Sinus Markt- und Sozialforschung GmbH on behalf of MDG Medien-Service GmbH with the support of the German Bishops’ Conference.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Constant religiosity
__________________________________________________________________________________
An important finding of the study is how consistent religiosity remains. The decline in church membership does not mean that religiosity is losing importance among the population. The proportion of people who describe themselves as ‘religious people’ has been remarkably stable over the past 25 years and fluctuates between 42 and 49 percent in the comparatively narrow corridor. On the other hand, the segment of Catholics who see themselves as Christians without the church meaning much to them has tended to grow.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Wide reach for topics on faith and religion
__________________________________________________________________________________
Overall, a good third of Catholics – including an above-average number of church-affiliated segments – also use the Internet for church or religious content. Religious books are also read in comparatively high proportions by Catholics from segments further away from the church and younger age groups. The greatest interest is in books about the meaning of life or about overcoming crises of meaning or life. Church or religious offerings on radio and television have a remarkable reach and sometimes also reach segments that are more distant from the church. The MDG trend monitor underlines the increasing importance of church communication. Catholics close to the church search for and find media offerings locally. In addition, religious and church issues should be made visible in secular media. A chance encounter with these topics is possible there and is often met with interest.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Target group-specific communication as a success factor
__________________________________________________________________________________
14- to 17-year-old Catholics are particularly committed to the church and are intensively concerned with their beliefs. This group requires a different linguistic and media approach than older groups. In particular, 18 to 29-year-old Catholics are hardly ever involved in church anymore. Nevertheless, it is precisely at this age that life planning takes place and offers are sought out and used. Target group-specific communication can significantly close the existing “digitization gap” between generations.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Digital and cross-media offers as an opportunity
__________________________________________________________________________________
There is no medium that is clearly used by a majority of Catholics. What applies to all media professionals applies to church media: the future lies in cross-media and the combination of different offerings. No separate laws apply to the church media market. Like all media, digital channels are used interest-driven, with the difference that this behavior can be measured more precisely digitally. It is a great opportunity to specifically address the target groups and support them in their search according to their needs.
The MDG trend monitor religious communication 2020/21. Attitudes, target groups, messages and communication channels are published by Herder Verlag. It is available as a PDF file for 34.99 euros, and from August 30, 2021 also as a printed book for 58 euros (approx. 413 pages).
Open Password Archive – Publications
OPEN PASSWORD ARCHIVE
DATA JOURNALISM
Handelsblatt’s Digital Reach