Love, love, love @Bookshop_Org, but wish it would credit the authors of the blurbs it cites for its own goodness, particularly since I'm the author of the second one here. Drives me batty when publishers do this too. Credit authors and include the source.
Here's my column from aways back making the case that it's in publishers' interests to always include the name of the reviewer with the pull-quote blurb. Building awareness of the voices who champion your books is smart business. chicagotribune.com/entertainment/…
I also link exclusively to @Bookshop_Org from my Substack newsletter every single week and have moved enough merch to generate $70 in affiliate income (donated to @OpenBooks) this year. biblioracle.substack.com
None of this is malicious. I don't think @Bookshop_Org is trying to shut the authors out, but it is following a longstanding practice/convention that simply doesn't make sense for any of the parties involved.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Good analysis on the gyrations the powerful go through to deny that their objections are purely political, rather than principled. Strip away the fig leaf and it's obvious, and the pattern is clear.
To me, this is identical to how the framework of Coddling the American Mind is used to thwart challenges and dissent from students. Student dissent is pathologized, and the august, (almost exclusively white) faculty police what speech is and is not in bounds.
Coddling does not just present a different ethos from student protestors, it explicitly argues that certain types of protest and speech are the product of a (treatable) mental disorder. People like @JonHaidt are then positioned to say who is and who is not exhibiting pathology.
Holy moly is this some shameful stuff from @HdxAcademy whitewashing Campus Reform's bad faith assaults on faculty speech and pattern of engendering harassment against faculty. This is really beneath an organization that claims to support free inquiry. heterodoxacademy.org/blog/condemnin…
The author even acknowledges Campus Reform's self-stated aim to intimidate faculty that they characterize as "leftist thugs" and yet this it tut-tutted away because really, we gotta make sure we keep an eye on them liberals.
I mean, look at this garbage. This is essentially saying: "Sure, the study showed that appearing in Campus Reform results in threats and harassment, but on the other hand, what if those faculty deserved it?"
Oh, the irony! A plea from one think-tank school reformer retweeted by another calling for "constructive engagement" that relies on a partisan push poll as the evidence for his position. I'll be glad to engage constructively when they cut this shit out of their playbook.
Here's a "shared value" I could get behind, not relying on obvious propaganda to make my argument while claiming to be a good faith partner in pursuing equity in education.
Read and marvel at this rhetorical turd burger: "I am as anti-racist as they come, but I'm worried about a particular flavor of anti-racism because lots of people think it's un-American." How does someone type this with a straight face?
This piece from @deandad is spot on. And I would add that one of the contexts of a course is "community," and we have to be very cautious about how and when others interact with a class community because they don't have the full context. insidehighered.com/blogs/confessi…
One of the reasons I'm against surveillance tech in classrooms (including the LMS, by the way) is because I see them as a violation of the community. Feeling like you're being monitored by people outside the community without the full context is bad for teachers and students.
The lack of context and community understanding is also one of the reasons I find the standardized tests around writing instruction so troubling. You do the work of building a community of writers for a year and then boom, it's an anonymous assessor whose judgement matters.
I've been thinking about the differences between how Conor Friedersdorf and Adam Serwer, both writers at The Atlantic, approached the refusal of tenure for Nikole Hannah-Jones by the UNC Board of Governors. They're good examples to help students see how writers make choices.
First, some disclosures. I think Friedersdorf is one of the lamest public writers on the Internet. Even when I agree with him, I wonder why he bothers writing. He blocks me here because I mocked him for not seeing the similarities between Jordan Petersen and The Secret.
Adam Serwer, on the other hand, is one of the most penetrating observers of America today. His coinage of "The cruelty is the point," in describing the Trumpist Republican Party is cemented in history.
What's happening with Nikole Hannah-Jones at UNC is egregious, but by no means unique because conservatives control public higher education. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
I wrote the post below 5 years ago, before Trump was President, when he was barely a candidate. Even then conservatives were compromising the work of public higher ed with partisan actions. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
I find the Nikole Hannah-Jones story as framed as part of the cancel culture debate an utter distraction. We're talking about governing structures which make public higher ed playthings for ideologues in many states.