3 Responses to Should you enter the academic blogosphere? A discussion on whether scholars should take the time to write a blog about their work

  1. I think a lot of important things in favour of blogging for social scientists has been said by John Slides in his paper “The Political Scientist as a Blogger“.

    So I’d just like to add some polemic remarks:

    Arguing that academics shouldn’t blog is saying that we should not get in contact with a wider public and to make our own and others’ research accessible by using communication tools that are more accessible than overpriced academic journals or theory- or method-driven academic texts that only make sense for insiders.

    Arguing that academics shouldn’t blog is equal to demanding we shouldn’t speak to the public about our work on non-academic conferences, during public debates, with friends and colleagues.

    Arguing that we shouldn’t publish our research on blogs is like preventing us from publishing conference papers on our own or the conference websites, a thing that already today happens thousands of times, making texts and research freely available before they have been peer-reviewed.

    Arguing we shouldn’t give away our ideas for free is the most stupid thing ever. Academia lives from the free circulation of ideas, and in an age where the sharing of ideas has become more important than ever not using social media tools to share ideas is so pre-20th-century.

    Arguing we shouldn’t blog is forcing us to obey to outdated publication rhythms (e.g. peer reviews that take a year).

    Arguing we shouldn’t blog is the desperate trial by those who have earned their reputation through closed-up discourses in old-style formats to prevent the next generation from making use of new tools.

    Arguing that because something is published in a blog it can’t be peer reviewed is funny. Nothing is easier than to criticise something written in a blog. There’s a mistake in what we wrote: Leave a critical or corrective comment below. You’ve got alternative evidence? Blog it on your own blog and within a day the debate can start (instead of three months later in the next issue of journal).

    I could continue… :)

    All this doesn’t say blogging can replace all the other activities that come along with being an academic. However, it’s clear that most arguments against blogging ignore a) the advantages of blogging and b) the fact that it’s not so much different from what is already happening in reality outside blogs.

  2. Paul Bernal says:

    I blog reasonably regularly, both on my own blog and on more ‘famous’ blogs, and I now see it as a crucial part of my work. It has two specific advantages which I have seen in practice. The first is immediacy – I can write a blog about a current event, put it up, and get an immediate reaction, which can then shape my thoughts and my ‘more serious’ work. The second is that it can make links – though blogging and tweeting I’ve managed to get far, far more people to read my ‘proper’ peer-reviewed work than would otherwise have done so.

    Blogging and tweeting generate audience, make links, and provide a source of further information. There’s another big point for people like me: I’m an early-career academic – in my position it can really overcome the difficulty of not being a ‘name’. It gives me a chance to make at least some kind of impact…

  3. Pingback: Should you enter the academic blogosphere? |

Comments are closed.