What can blogging do for archaeology? Revisited

middlesavagery.wordpress.com
Courtesy of Colleen Morgan, middlesavagery.wordpress.com

Last week, my friend Colleen Morgan at Middle Savagery began the web-based equivalent of a roundtable discussion on archaeological blogging in advance of her session on this topic at the upcoming SAA meetings.  From my perspective, the response to her call for commentary was fantastic, and is well-summarised both by her and others (e.g., Brenna at Passim in Passing).

Her question for this week goes as follows:

…Blogging gives new scholars a chance to speak out, to debunk 2012 foolishness and to give a little bit back to the public that usually signs our paychecks in one way or another. Though it is generally embraced…public outreach can be incredibly difficult, tricky, and prone to hidden downsides. Blogging archaeology is often fraught with tensions that are sometimes not immediately apparent. Beyond the general problems that come with performing as a public intellectual, what risks do archaeologists take when they make themselves available to the public via blogging? What (if any) are the unexpected consequences of blogging? How do you choose what to share?

There have already been a lot of meaningful responses to these questions by other bloggers (see Dirt, Where in the hell am I, Passim in Passing, Adventures in Archaeology, etc.), and I follow various excellent blogs where the implications of blogging (including the potential for commentators to propagate unfounded and deprecative arguments) have become very obvious (e.g., see here).

In the interests of brevity, I won’t add to these comments beyond saying that I think we have a responsibility to remember that blogging is simply one form of media, and whilst people (especially academics) like to pick on it as an especially dangerous and uncontrollable communicative device, I think this is misconstrued and blinding.  Blogs and social media have advantages and disadvantages—like every other type of communicative tool.  By focusing on them alone (as is common in academia), I’m concerned that we are all-too-conveniently avoiding discussion of the limitations and, indeed, prejudices of other modes of publication (e.g., the academic journal or text or edited volume).  These modes are often exclusive, insular, and inaccessible (both physically, linguistically and intellectually).  They offer limited opportunities to respond.  They can become canonised and cemented as truth and, in so doing, serve to perpetuate the status quo.

What is critical, as I see it, is that ALL media are risky and unpredictable; ALL media need critical dissection and constant questioning as to their validity and impact; ALL media require that we hide some details and share others, and that we otherwise make potentially restrictive decisions about what information to make public and what to keep to ourselves.

Our concern for the limitations (& affordances) of blogging should not, I hope, eclipse attention to the problems (& possibilities) of other types of archaeological communication.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “What can blogging do for archaeology? Revisited

  1. “What is critical, as I see it, is that ALL media are risky and unpredictable; ALL media need critical dissection and constant questioning as to their validity and impact; ALL media require that we hide some details and share others, and that we otherwise make potentially restrictive decisions about what information to make public and what to keep to ourselves.”

    Exactly. All forms of media have their limits–and their possibilities. And, rather than just dismissing one form of media (blogs) or another (academic journals), we need to pay close attention to the potential and drawbacks of each and move forward from there.

    Great points about some of the issues with journals, and more open discussions in these types of online forums/spaces adds something that just isn’t possible in print journals.

    Thanks for posting this.

  2. Thanks so much, Ryan. I’ve actually been thinking of you as Colleen’s carnival has been going on, & wondering if you’d contribute to the conversation. Really great to read your post and have you extend the conversation to include images!

  3. I am a sociologist, now semi-retired. In the last few years Ihave become very involved in doing art work which is sometimes based on petroglyphs I have photographed here in the southwest. This activity has led me to become interested in pre columbian history. A further interest is high tech, and using it to produce art. As an old timer myself I find it interesting that ther seems to be some trepidation about allowing the public to see archeologists in the process of doing their work. I can understand the hesitance, but do not agree with the underlying assumption that the public will misundertstand and distort partial findings, etc. Yes this can and will happen, but opening up discussion to amateurs has been proven to be of great value in many fields. Crowd sourcing is employed by more and more businesses, and I have no doubt it can be applied in social sciences too. I am interested in others ideas about this.

  4. Thanks Sara–I’ll be interested to see if there are more discussions about using images online. I am always preoccupied with trying to figure out what to post and what to leave out!

  5. Thanks so much for your comments, Roger — it’s wonderful to hear from people working on/thinking about similar ideas in different disciplines. Do you have any of your artwork visible online? It would be great to see more of what you’re experimenting with!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s