Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Blogging vs Academia

What type of writing ...

- measures its success by inbound links?
- cross-links to peers on the same subject (out-linking to as many as possible)?
- presents huge lists of similar authors with each of its publications?
- gets its authors interviewed and invited to conferences?
- publishes posts chronologically?
- has A-listers through Z-listers?
- has better and worse platforms and authoring tools?
- tries to attract advertisements and sponsors?
- may get paid per post?
- has to publish regularly or loses its audience?
- tries to get the most eyeballs?
- must check facts or risk losing reputation?

There are still a few differences between academia and blogging:

- Academia relies on exhaustive research. Academic posts are supposed to survey all material on a topic, not only those that support their argument. Most blog posts survey only a limited amount of material, or are "off the cuff".
- Academia is painstaking and slow to write, too slow for the blogging world.
- Academia is usually meticulously edited. Academia is often peer-reviewed before publication. Blogs really should be.
- An individual academic writes about only one very narrow topic, consistently, while many bloggers tend to cover a wider range of topics.
- Academia is intended to further the sum total of human knowledge. Most blogging is for personal expression or entertainment.

Post a Comment