Thinking about legitimacy

By Christina Morin

With the 2nd Pue’s Occurrences symposium only a week away, I’ve been thinking a lot about the theme we’ve chosen to focus on: ‘Web Legitimacy’. This was an issue that popped up again and again at our first symposium last year and one that we, like many of last year’s participants, felt important enough to concentrate on this year. We’ll be focusing on issues of legitimacy particular to blogging – whether academic or not – but much of what we’ll be discussing also pertains to other web-based publications and, indeed, Digital Humanities as a whole. Several participants in last year’s symposium voiced the concern that online publishing – specifically that without a corresponding print publication – simply isn’t weighted as heavily as more traditional print formats. I know myself that in constructing my CV, there’s a certain hierarchy of publications to be followed in order suitably to impress the reader. Online publications always go last, irrespective of my perception of their ‘worth’ or ‘value’.

This hierarchical attitude towards online publications in the academic community has been reified in recent years by various large scale research assessment programs, chief among them, the RAE and now, the REF. While attempting scientifically to categorize and quantify the research outputs of both individuals and the schools/departments/universities to which they contribute, such exercises suggest that digital outputs – be they in the form of a blog, contributions to a web-based academic journal or encyclopedia, or myriad other such outputs – are a negligible, at the very least, less worthy, asset of academic life in comparison to traditional, printed monographs, journal articles, and editions. Ironically, however, in sciences and maths, the monograph – the seeming end all and be all for academics in the humanities – is relegated to a lowly position, while digital outputs receive a far higher ranking, a situation that highlights the inconsistencies inherent to the weighting of outputs across the disciplines. 

As I got worked up about the unfairness of it all, I was fortuitously directed (by one of this year’s speakers – Orla Murphy) to the blog of Professor Laura Mandall, director of the Digital Humanities Program at the Armstrong Institute of Interactive Media Studies at Miami University. In a post titled ‘What the Digital Humanities (is)n’t: Free’ (5 January 2011), Mandall considers the costs of Digital Humanities, countering the ‘unrealistic expectation’ or understanding that Digital Humanities represents a cash cow of sorts that only needs to be milked to provide this (and/or the next) generation of academics with enough funding to set them up for life. More pertinent to this discussion, however, is Mandall’s insistence that people rethink their understanding of digital resources as ‘free’ – as in financially free and universally available. This is, of course, something that will be familiar to all researchers who have attempted to access a scholarly database only to find that their institution doesn’t subscribe. The material archived in these databases is, as Mandall correctly points out, most certainly not free, either to individuals or to institutions.

While these accessibility costs are relatively straightforward and evident to all, the costs in time and effort to produce the publications held in those archives is less readily quantified. As the publisher of many online and digital publications, some simultaneously published in print as well, Mandall argues that digital publications entail a similar, if not more arduous, labour on the part of those producing them. Such effort, however, seems not to accord the same respect as that associated with traditional print formats. Despite the growing demand for digital media, therefore, there appears to be little understanding of how properly to quantify and thereby ‘price’ digital outputs.

Mandall herself offers no easy answers to the dilemma of valuing digital media, nor, I expect, will we arrive at any such solutions at next week’s symposium. Perhaps, however, as with many issues in academia today, it’s enough to be engaging in such discussions with the hope of, and belief in, change, however gradual.


5 Responses to “Thinking about legitimacy”

  1. Tweets that mention Thinking about legitimacy « Pue's Occurrences -- Says:

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by MLB, Pue's Occurrences. Pue's Occurrences said: Thinking about legitimacy […]

  2. puesoccurrences Says:

    Interesting post Tina- thanks for bringing Mandall’s post to my attention. I am looking forward to next Friday,

  3. Póló Says:

    I am not an academic and don’t have academic publications specifically in mind here.

    I would have thought the digital publications superior in terms of interactivity, searchability and accessibility (though I take the point on not every institution subscribing to all services).

    Perhaps the perceived superiority of printed matter arises from it being perceived as invariably mediated/moderated/edited. This is essentially an older mindset as the trick online is to find trusted sources.

    I remember the amazement of a certain elderly, and well educated and literary person, when I told him that anyone could publish on the web. He was not only amazed, but appalled.

    In my own case, be it blog or website, I put at least as much effort into what I publish as I would for hardcopy publication.

  4. Tina Says:

    I think the issue of peer review is a key one when looking at the current perception of digital publications. Something that is peer-reviewed will, I think, always be ranked higher than something published outside the remit of peer-review, regardless of the amount of time and effort you’ve put into it.

    I suspect such ranking is slightly different when it comes to online archival databases and the like, but I’m not really familiar enough with the production process of such databases, or indeed, the perception of them within the academic community, to comment.

  5. Reminder for Honest to Blog « Pue's Occurrences Says:

    […] will be a Q&A after each panel and a roundtable discussion in the afternoon that discusses web legitimacy and publishing on the internet. You can register online and find the progrramme […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: