Comments on: To Blog Or Not To Blog – That Is An Academic’s Question

By: Thou Shalt Not Blog… « Running With Scissors

Thou Shalt Not Blog… « Running With Scissors — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:05:12 +0000

[...] Shalt Not Blog… Jump to Comments The ACRLog has an interesting post about whether or not those in academia should blog. Overall I agree that blogging has value. Bell [...]

By: ts;db

ts;db — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:21:47 +0000

[...] of length in particular (and essays in general) relates to academic librarians. Steven Bell has written recently on ACRLog and (with David Murray) in College & Research Library News about faculty members who publish [...]

By: iLibrarian » Happy New Year!

iLibrarian » Happy New Year! — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:52:15 +0000

[...] given 2.0 librarians. Librarians were asked why they blogged and academics debated whether they should or shouldn’t at all. Meanwhile the entire biblioblogosphere was surveyed and [...]

By: The RePEc blog » Blog Archive » More on peer review and blogging

The RePEc blog » Blog Archive » More on peer review and blogging — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 05:09:09 +0000

[...] There is also a discussion on this topic on the blog of the Association of College & Research Libraries. [...]

By: DerikB

DerikB — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 22:11:49 +0000

“I have a problem with anonymous bloggers who use their posts to insult or criticize the work of others. It’s a cowardly act…”

I have to strongly disagree with the lumping of “insult” with “critici[sm]“. I agree anonymous (or any) insults are to be looked down upon, but criticism is a rather different enterprise than insult. Criticizing ideas is not personal, and I don’t see why it matters if the criticizer is anonymous or not.

Too often I see the de-valuation in our culture of “criticism” as another form of insult or personal attack, and it is an easy way to shut down conversation, dissent, or disagreement.

By: James McGrath

James McGrath — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:35:34 +0000

Rather than repeat it here, let me share my own blog post on why I think it is worth blogging (especially when one’s spouse suggests that the time spent blogging would be better spent writing one’s next book!):

http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2007/10/blog-vs-book-smackdown.html

By: Thou Shalt Not Blog… « A Room With A View

Thou Shalt Not Blog… « A Room With A View — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:18:54 +0000

[...] Shalt Not Blog… The ACRLog has an interesting post about whether or not those in academia should blog. Overall I agree that blogging has value. Bell [...]

By: stevenb

stevenb — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 01:16:31 +0000

I acknowledged in my post that anonymous blogging has its benefits, and I understand there are situations when it is the best option. I respect the opinions of commenters here, but I’ll maintain the position I made in my post – and my agreement with John Berry. If you want to criticize my work, at least have the courage of your convictions to say who you are. That said, anonymous evaluations – such as those received at the end of a presentation – are of value. But I think the two situations are quite different. And yes, when the anonymous writer is insulting and ridicules – that is offensive – and if you want to offer constructive criticism anonymously – at least keep it professional.

By: LearnBold

LearnBold — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:53:08 +0000

I disagree. I am an anonymous blogger (http://interminablerumor.wordpress.com/) and I need to be considering that I’m an untenured librarian. My interest lies in documenting my experience as a new mother on the tenure track, but it is a reality that what I write while untenured could be used against in my bid for tenure. In my posts I try not to criticize people and hide behind the veil of anonymity. I intend to come out of the bloggers closet after a decision on tenure has been made. It is a tough choice, but I’ve decided to remain anonymous for now!

By: Marc Meola

Marc Meola — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:33:29 +0000

My sympathies are more with anonymous authors than the people who claim it is cowardly. In professional writing it seems to me more likely that bad ideas and practices will not be critiqued honestly for fear of repercussions than anything else. What harm is it doing the named author that the person is anonymous? And what help does it have to have the person’s name? (So you can deny them that job, reject their article, reject their conference proposal….?) If the anonymity just lets them go off on someone without warrant, then I agree it’s cowardly.

Joseph Fulda has a discussion of this in “The Ethics of Pseudonymous Publication” in the Fall 2007 issue of the Journal of Information Ethics. Fulda claims that authors have a duty to not deceive their audience, and therefore questions about whether pseudonymous authors have a right to address the very audience from which they seek to conceal their identity for fear of repercussions are very difficult, and can only be answered by persons with a very sure moral compass. Gee thanks Joe.

Fulda points out that the veil of pseudonymity is more easily pierced than what many people suppose, and that when it is, people tend to hate you even more. Anonymous bloggers perhaps might take heed of this point.