I have very mixed feelings about her talk. First off, I very much enjoyed the first part of the talk where she detailed information history. The particular part about Plato’s vision about the discussion about how the definition of “public” changed throughout history. She is clearly very knowledgable on the topic, and that assures me about this source of information. However, the second part of the lecture felt a lot more distant. I would have appreciated it more if she spoke from personal experience about her work. I am actually very curious about the parameters of her work and how that affects the public as she defines it.

I liked the way she presented. She spoke in an articulate way that was easy to understand. However, as a whole of the “lecture” I wasn’t sure what I was supposed to take away from it. Perhaps she could have been a little more direct about the purpose of her talk.