« Inflation continues to creep upward... what next for Fed? | Main | The plot thickens »
August 3, 2006
Why do economists blog?
The Economist asks the question, but doesn't hit on any very satisfactory answers. New Economist links to the article and points us back to Brad DeLong's idea of the Invisible College--which I think does a much better job of explaining the value of academic blogging, of which economic blogs are a healthy subset.
I did find one bit from the article worth mentioning, however.
With professors spending so much time blogging for no payment, universities might wonder whether this detracts from their value. Although there is no evidence of a direct link between blogging and publishing productivity, a new study* by E. Han Kim and Adair Morse, of the University of Michigan, and Luigi Zingales, of the University of Chicago, shows that the internet's ability to spread knowledge beyond university classrooms has diminished the competitive edge that elite schools once held.
...
* “Are Elite Universities Losing Their Competitive Edge?” by E. Han Kim, Adair Morse and Luigi Zingales. NBER working paper 12245, May 2006.
I think that is true. A person can have access to the insight of a Brad DeLong or a Greg Mankiw anywhere in the world for the price of an internet connection. That means that my students at Western Illinois University can discuss what DeLong and Mankiw happen to be talking about that day. That didn't happen when I was in college. For a professor, the internet is a professional lifeline. Being a blogger connects you to the larger world in a way that is hard to define. My site statistics show hits coming in from all over the world. I may not have as many active commenters as the major sites, but comments are of generally high quality. There is a demand for what we do, and we get something in return, even if it is not measured in dollars and cents (or pounds or euros). As a professor, blogging about economics allows you to participate in conversations about policy and theory that used to happen only occasionally at conferences or in the faculty lounges of the "elite" schools. That is not to diminish the "elites". Any place where you can have a couple of Nobel laureates and someone like DeLong or Mankiw congregate in a hallway is still going to retain a prominent standing. But it is not in their interest to keep that hallway conversation to themselves. They want to influence the public debate. They want the immediacy that blogging provides. The ideas flow more freely. The invisible college grows.
Furthermore, blogging forces one to sit down and write. It disciplines a person to think about voice, audience, clarity, style, etc. It keeps you sharp intellecutally by reading everything that comes your way in your fields of interest. My publication record has not suffered as a result of blogging. If anything, I write more and think more clearly. It is also a good source of ideas for teaching and research. As the medium matures and as I mature as a practitioner, I expect that things will get even better. The economist as blogger is a phenomenon that is here to stay.
Posted by William Polley at August 3, 2006 4:22 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.williampolley.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/567
Comments
I think you are right on with this posting. The "invisible college" permits experts from far beyond academia to chime in on particular discussions, which pushes the author toward a more thoughtful on-line product. When blogging, academics are unsheltered by tenure and the in-bred ideas of their particular school. This trend will raise the value of the very best teachers (who can leverage their knowledge, teaching, and communication skills far better with the Internet than they can in one classroom), and will put the bad teachers out of work. Probably it starts with higher education, but it shouldn’t be long before it comes down to lower grades too. It’s exciting... and the academics who feel threatened by this are right to be scared.
Posted by: Regret at August 25, 2006 10:47 AM