"Social media and Civil War historians" Topic

link

Something to think about

The article assumes a priori that social media is a Good Thing.
I'm yet to be convinced.

OFM +1

Plus, serious historians spend enormous amounts of time doing research and writing. Most are also university professors.

I find his arguments to be surprisingly shallow for a law professor.

It is, first off, obvious that the short-form, transient format of social media is a less than ideal medium for subjects of any depth or nuance.

When he bemoans historians' lack of participation in spite of their acknowledgement of social media's influence, he doesn't even consider that they might be flagging that influence as negative. When he wonders how they can call social media a "sewer" if they don't read it regularly, he forgets that you don't need to drink from a sewer twice (much less daily) to know it's a sewer. When he says that historians' absence from social media leaves the medium open to "cranks and crackpots", he fails to calculate that, even if every historian became more active on social media, they would still be outnumbered by the crackpots, probably by multiple orders of magnitude. When he fails to see historians' products and collaboration on social media, he doesn't consider that they might be collaborating and marketing elsewhere because they know their target audience (those who think seriously and deeply about history) are not on social media.

Well said, War Artisan!

I agree with all three of the above posters. I get very discouraged when I read some "short-attention span" Historical drivel on social media site. But then I just turn to my fairly extension library of hard-bound military history books and recover my equilibrium.

Jim

ColCampbell +1

All of the above +1.

What is this "social media" I keep hearing about? :-). I think it is maybe for drips.

Also, all of the above +1.

Will we have here that rare and unique thing, agreement from all on the ACW Discussion Board?

Back at the end of June, I wrote up a piece on Meade's Pipe Creek Line for Facebook. It garnered a number of Likes and a Share. It was a short piece, but people seemed to like and understand it.
Admittedly, this isn't as complex as explaining the way the succession to the English throne played out leading to the Wars of the Roses, which you have to understand if you want to grasp late Medieval English history or the plays of Shakespeare.

Grelber

Social media is neither…

Ditto to all the useful comments above. I think professional historians can live without "internet communication."

If you get a book published, you at least get some reward (not enough) for your time, expertise, etc. On social media you don't.

I finished working on my Master's and Ph.D just before the Internet really took off and well before social media. I do have to wonder how having the net might have affected my academic efforts. But historians do tend to lag behind on such things. My advisor, Russell Weigley, still wrote his books using a manual typewriter :)

And good books they were/are!