Before I get started, let me just qualify that my comments only refer to specific kinds of bloggers and blogs and are not intended as a generalization. What I found worthy is this week’s reading are Miller’s contention that voyeurism and exhibitionism “have been morally neutralized and are on their ways to becoming ordinary modes of being, subject positions that are inscribed in our mediated discourse” (5). I may be judging blogs and bloggers a little harshly here, but I believe voyeurism and exhibitionism are the impetus that initially attracts new curious bloggers to the medium in the first place. Several people in the class have pointed out that they got started with blogging by lurking. The Gurak et al. article points to the low numbers of people using blogs; however, the article also reveals that “eleven percent of these same users indicate that they visit blogs daily” (2). I can’t say that I necessarily view bloggers who act as voyeurs or exhibitionists on the web any differently than I do voyeurs or exhibitionists who participate in non-electronic public forums – all thrive on the immediacy of shock value in a given situation.
Though I admit that blogs are respectable outlets for creativity and intellectual knowledge, I find that we may be premature in the amount of credibility that we attribute to them and that we are weighing in on their academic worth far too early. The jury, endurance of time, is still out on this one. I admire the authors of the Gurak et al. article who point out that they “focus on the weblog as rhetorical artifact” and that their collection is the “first in its innovative approach to scholarly publishing” (2). Without a doubt these scholars are pioneers of a new way to publish scholarly works. However, I wonder if this new method of publication is permanent?
I’m a little skeptical about the lasting contribution and academic integrity of blogging. Sure, people will read and participate on blogs, but the whole idea that we will somehow give them the equal respect as we do other works of more traditional literature seems a little premature to me. I would be interested to know how scholars of traditional literature view the whole idea of using blogs to bypass rigorous publication processes. Thus, how do professors who publish their scholarly works in traditional publications view works that are published on this forum?
More than anything, I agree with Miller that one of the reasons for the rapid evolution of weblogs is their ability to offer “an exigence” for almost anyone with a voice (8), but weblogs also offer other elements found in the rhetorical situation – the writer, subject, audience, and purpose. For me, the rhetorical situation is the best reason to keep the topic of blogging high on anyone’s priority list.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree that the importance of blogging, like all things, will be judged by the test of time. However, we are already seeing some signs that blogging has become a recognized forum with literary value. For instance, my EPS 540 class (Education for Social Justice) will be reading "Baghdad Burning" by "Riverbend." This book is entirely comprised of blog entries from a 24-year-old Iraqi woman in occupied Baghdad. I have heard of this book referred to as "the Anne Frank of our generation." I have trouble with that label, but then again, I have not read the book yet. What is important is that we are seeing blogs move from their temporary status on the internet to more lasting forms of publication. Moreover, these works are considered worthy of academic attention in a classroom setting.
-- Exile1975
I'm chiming in a bit late, here, but I did want to comment on the following:
"I would be interested to know how scholars of traditional literature view the whole idea of using blogs to bypass rigorous publication processes. Thus, how do professors who publish their scholarly works in traditional publications view works that are published on this forum?"
Blogging, as its used for academic publication, is not intended (usually) to bypass the rigorous publication process. The articles published in Into the Blogosphere collection, for instance, underwent the same review and publication process as does any article published in a print journal or a print collection of scholarly essays. This is one misperception of online publication - while many publications now present scholarship online, because of the medium alone, they are often misunderstood as unreviewed.
Second, blogging about academic scholarship does not serve to replace the publication process, but rather serves as another step in that process. By presenting works in progress to a public readership, you can receive valuable feedback before submitting it for publication. This way, I would argue, the peer review process is actually more rigorous - beginning earlier and adding more voices. An article sent in to a journal for publication may reach 3 reviewers, while an article presented on a blog will reach multiple readers in addition to those 3 reviewers.
The idea that online publication does not undergo a rigorous review process is a common misperception. But as we access more and more scholarly literature online, on blogs, in online journals, through libraries who offer electronic versions of print publications, it is important that we carefully consider each instance and the review processes that do occur there. The distinction between publishing online and in print will soon be a moot point - the medium alone will not determine its rigor and credibility but instead we'll look for what we can find out about the review process specific to that publication.
Post a Comment