why I blog. As it turns out, I may have been deceiving myself and my readers. It turns out that I am far more strategic than I thought, as blogging may increase one's reputation in the field, if political scientists are anything like economists (that is our aspiration as they make more money).
I do know that more folks are aware of certain scholars because of their web 2.0 (or whatever) efforts, such as Dan Drezner, Marc Lynch, the folks at the Duck of Minerva and elsewhere. But more visibility may not mean a better reputation, just perhaps a reputation for being silly, distracted, entertaining, snarky, indiscreet, whatever. I would guess that the nature of the heightened reputation would largely be shaped by the quality of the blog. To use Drezner as an example, I am pretty sure he is positively viewed by most folks, although the nattering nabobs of negativism at Political Science Job Rumors see Drezner negatively. Not a surprise, but does provide the dose of caution that more visibility can provoke jealousy as well as admiration.
So, the folks behind the first post asked the next question--impact on policy? Their next post may provide some data to answer the question, but they are asking folks to provide their own views on this. An interesting conversation to follow.
Post a Comment