Walt Crawford has an interesting article in the latest edition of Econtent:
Crawford, W. (2007). The Renascence of the Writer. Econtent, 30(2), 44. Retrieved March 8, 2007, from [Ebscohost] or [WorldCat].
One thesis that I’m working on here is that there is a nascent category of blogging which I’m thinking of as “academic blogging” which can be used by any academic (or anyone for that matter) to advance their careers simply through the act of reading and commentary. Here’s Crawford:
Blogs offer a safe way to get started. There are no expectations,
no grading, no rejection letters. Initially, there may not even be
any readers. You can start with a pseudonym and add your real
name on an About page later, when and if readers appreciate
what you’re doing. You can start with a paragraph on something
of momentary interest, build to a short short story (usually but
not always nonfiction) on something that interests you more—
and possibly progress to a series of linked posts that, taken as
a whole, constitute an essay or story well worth preserving
and expanding.
I agree with that. The barrier to entry for blogging is essentially nil (aside from the costs of time and effort.) But Crawford also brings up an interesting signal-to-noise model that I hadn’t heard of: Sturgeon’s Law where 90% of everything is crud. Interestingly though, he’s using this in a 90:9:1 formulation where 90% is crud, 9% is interesting, and 1% will continue to be published long-term. That sounds about right. But for those of us in academia, I think it’s possible to be a member of both the 90% and 1% clubs at the same time. Just because it’s crud, doesn’t mean I’ll stop writing it.
Post a Comment