As a sort of side note to recent conversations in the archivo-blogosphere about preserving digital conversation,and the sometimes fleeting nature of born-digital materials,I’ve been following a few discussions about the nature of blogging and how that fits with the academic system. The question of whether blogs can be “worthwhile”and “academic”has been floating around out there for awhile–and I think has already been ably answered by many,so I won’t rehash that discussion. I believe that blogs can be not only a way to reach out to a wider audience,but also a great way for students and other faculty,including librarians and archivists,to become better informed and engaged with the university community. Blogging and participating in reasoned,thoughtful discussion can provide the participants with a greater understanding of viewpoints and opinions that they might not have previously encountered. However,should publishing on academic blogs and other digital scholarship be part of the tenure-track discussion for librarians and archivists? Does building a website based on interpretation of primary source materials serve as an academic contribution? How should digital scholarship be evaluated,and can it be adequately compared with old-media contributions? Should it be?
Anonymity is something that critics decry as a problem with giving blogs and their contributors credibility–another is the lack of peer review. However,for those already following the outrage over the Annoyed Librarian,it might seem as though we’ve crossed both of those bridges already–the most recent issue of the “peer-reviewed”Journal of Access Services was entirely written by that same pseudonoymous blogger (though I’m not sure that’s the best example). Eric Schnell over at The Medium is the Message has posted recently about rethinking scholarship in academic librarianship and the need for us to redefine the understanding of scholarly communication to fit with changes in the profession–go take a look. Eric has some great links,including one on the Modern Language Association’s discussion of tenure requirements and this report (pdf) from the Ithaka Group that explores how (non-librarian) faculty are using digital scholarly resources.
So,why am I bringing all of this up? Well,if blogs and other digital media are considered to be scholarship of enduring value,how will all of this information be kept? Who will be storing it,and what will become the “authoritative”copy? How will it be accessed,now and in the future? What kind of architecture do we have as archivists and “keepers of memory”,as contributors,as bloggers,as users and consumers of information to ensure that digital scholarly contributions will be around and available for the long haul? I don’t have all of the answers,but I’d love to hear your thoughts.