Response to Gannon
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 2 I would agree with Gannon on his response to the serious academic, and like the author commenter’s, I would try to do so in a witty way and of course, less than 140 characters. I do feel the need to take his side because who doesn’t love a good twitter war? Just this morning on the radio they were announcing how there was a twitter war between the Los Angeles Angles baseball team and the band Smash Mouth about baseball and I felt the need to totally agree with Smash Mouth, even though I don’t want baseball or listen to Smash Mouth anymore. I don’t know if it’s because social media has turned me into an argument-loving person or if that’s just the English major in me talking.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 1 But overall, social media in scholarship can be a good and bad thing. On a bad note, it isn’t really good to respond to something right away, such as live-tweeting an event. I’m still all for it because it lets the crowd become more engaged in the discussion, rather than just a listener, but tweeting something immediately, for the world to see, isn’t always the best choice. What if you only heard the beginning argument and then made conclusions already in your tweet? What if, while tweeting something terrible about the lecturer, you don’t hear him say something that you really would agree with? I do somewhat enjoy the fact that people aren’t as restraint and that you can speak your mind freely with the first thing that pops up in your head, but that also isn’t the best in some cases. You usually need time and revaluation to fully produce a good argument, not 30 seconds and 140 characters.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 As a lecturer, you would probably find more criticism than praise in people’s social media response, which can weaken your ego unfortunately (but maybe some serious academics need that). Though there is a plus to knowing what people react to immediately to your presentation, rather than let them think it through like a rational adult (it can also be super entertaining).
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 1 I don’t think it’s detrimental to the traditional academic practice at all, just a different perspective and interaction you can achieve. I think it’d be detrimental if all academic responses were this way for sure, but I don’t see academics going down that rabbit hole anytime soon.
You say “I feel the need to totally agree with Smash Mouth… even though I don’t want baseball.”
And I just think that’s hilarious. I think you meant watch? Probably? But I don’t want baseball is just as good.
I was not aware of this controversy, but I am glad to hear that you don’t listen to Smash Mouth (“anymore …”).