Thread by @TheTattooedProf

Is it just me, or are the articles in this particular genre always authored by humanities folks? Which begs the question: if the humanities are dying, does it make sense to reject our most powerful tool for engaging larger publics? (1/)
chronicle.com/interactives/2…

2/ I'm not going to pretend there aren't problems with social media and the ways in which some people engage in those spaces. But I would be careful about assuming the status quo-including "impact" journals, good old boy networks, and conferences-is the hill we want to die on.

3/ This article's critique of social media and its metric-driven, SEO-type culture, where profiles and clicks after the coin of the realm, implicitly assumes the way we have scholarly conversations off social media is free of those motivations & inequities. That's just not so.

4/ I would suggest that the way we use tools, social media or otherwise, reflects larger structures of inequality, of power imbalances, of "elites" clinging to the things that they believe make them elite. It's true for Twitter, academia dot edu, or perceptions of dept reputation

5/ In a moment where public engagement from humanists is vital, to retreat into some cloister where we eschew the very tools with which we can do some of that engagement because they don't fit some platonic ideal of The Discourse™ strikes me as an odd strategy.

6/ If I smash my thumb with a hammer, I don't stop using hammers; I learn to use them more skillfully. So too for social media. There are a bunch of scholars who extend the reach and power of their excellent work using social media tools. Your mileage may vary, but it can be done

7/ Look at folks like @KevinMKruse @HC_Richardson @KeishaBlain
@nataliapetrzela @julianzelizer @Econ_Marshall @jbf1755 @ErikLoomis @DrIbram. And many more--those are just some of the scholars who showed up when I typed "@", which means I've engaged with them often on here.

8/ I can understand why some might not be as big of social media fans as others. And Dog knows philosophy has had its share of social media-driven embarrassments. But to make the argument that it's damaging scholarship, as if scholarship is doing A-OK otherwise, is dubious.

9/ Use the tools you have, in ways that are skillful and authentic to you, to engage larger publics. If you're in the humanities, this is an imperative. It's short-sighted to make a sweeping dismissal of one powerful set of those tools. And I don't think we have that luxury.

10/ I also can't help but think the anti-social media stuff in academe is a result of its leveling potential. Hierarchies and gatekeeping thrive on limited access. I've done a quick look at recent pieces in the genre, and they're all by white TT/tenured men. That's telling. /fin