Master's dissertation on Lolcats

To give you a flavor of it without downloading, here's the introductory paragraph:<p>&#60;quote&#62; The rise of ‘Web 2.0’ (O’Reilly, 2007) has changed the way that people interact with theworld and with each other. Developments in ICT have enabled changes in commerce, politics, and interpersonal communication. Widespread consumption and creation of user-generated content (UGC) has ushered us into an era of participatory culture, breaking down the barriers between producer and consumer (Bruns, 2007), and allowing us to “take media into our own hands” (Jenkins et al., 2009: 29). This has contributed to the election of the first African-American President (Painter, 2009), and provided new tools for fighting governmental corruption (Shirky, 2010a). It has also given us Peanut Butter Jelly Time. &#60;/quote&#62;

It's disheartening to see the strong negative reactions to this. If human society and culture is worth studying, then "internet culture" is a necessary part of the story. I know from experience that there are multiple distinct communities that orbit the lolcat universe. There's more than enough depth here to warrant academic study.<p>Live and let live.

Is it not worth studying such a pervasive aspect of our culture, especially if it says something novel about ourselves?<p>I'm also quite interested in the rise of Rage Comics as a new medium and what it might evolve into. Certainly people love telling and listening to short stories, but today's tools are quite crude, yet still addictive (much like very early video games). I'd love to see the successor to Rage Comics 10 years from now.

Two people with master's degrees bumped into each other on the street.<p>One's dissertation was "Preparation of Substituted Enol Derivatives From Terminal Alkynes and Progress Toward the Total Synthesis of Nigricanoside A."<p>The other's was "An Investigation Into the Appeal of LOLcats."<p>"Hi, I have a master's degree," said the one.<p>"Hi, so do I," said the other.<p>Guess who punched who in the face.

My view on a dissertation -- whether it be for a masters degree or a Ph.D. -- is that the contribution is not the important part. Instead, the goal is to demonstrate an ability to do "good research" (TM). People find very narrow topics because thesis advisors prefer it. If you had an already well-studied topic, it is more difficult to access as original work. Yes, ideally you want to find something novel, narrow, and <i>practically useful</i>, but grad students primarily want their degree first.

For some reason I get really upset when people try to analyze internet culture. Especially if it earns them a Master's degree.<p>Is this normal?

While I think that the rise of internet subculture is very interesting from a sociological point of view, I doubt the phenomena is researched enough to warrant a study as narrow and specific as this.

The transcript for the focus meetings is hilarious...<p>MODERATOR: So the Lolspeak made sense to you?<p>JT: The Lolspeak made sense to me, and I found um, the Lolspeak translator, and I started sending all my emails in Lolspeak—<p>RK: That exists? I’m learning so much now!<p>MODERATOR: Well AB, the Cheez Town Cryer is almost all in Lolspeak, and—<p>AB: Uh, the Cween speaks perfect Lolspeak<p>RK: Hee heee!<p>Also, make sure to look at the focus group content full of Lolcats.

New title suggestion: "I can haz dugree plz?"