Yesterday I wrote about an article in the scholarly journal Civil War History by historian Earl Hess on “The Internet and Civil War Studies.” The article relies on surveys of Civil War historians, librarians, and archivists to gauge how academic professionals use the net. One section of the article that I found particularly troubling was a discussion of how Civil War historians use, or, more accurately, refuse to use social media to communicate with the public about the history they study.
More than half said they rarely or never used social media to communicate with the public! The same huge percentage said that they rarely or never even read social media posts on the Civil War! Wow!
A few years ago several professors had dinner with me. They were fans of my writing on immigrants in the American Civil War and they suggested that I refine my articles into a scholarly book. I was flattered that they thought something like this might get published. I asked how many copies of such a book were likely to be sold. The answer was “about a thousand.” I laughed. Nearly all of my online The Immigrants’ Civil War writing gets more people reading it than that. My top article got more than 130,000 readers when it was first published, and a number of other articles got in the tens of thousands of readers. My goal is to make history of neglected subjects like immigration and the Reconstruction Era available to anyone who wants to read it. I use footnoting and hyperlink sourcing to maintain transparancy and to allow my writing to be reviewed for accuracy by any reader.
I love scholarly books and articles, but most readers don’t have access to university libraries where they are stored. Because I am a law school professor, I get free access to these works, but I am very aware that I am one of a privileged few. I am able to read fifty or sixty university-published books on the Civil War and Reconstruction every year and to read the scholarly journals for free. I also have access to databases of newspapers and other primary source materials written in the 19th Century. Not everyone does, nor can everyone interpret this material. I am grateful that so many people read my blogs and trust me to help them through the sources. I also appreciate the generally thoughtful comments of these readers on my blogs and on my facebook pages.
For more than a decade the general public and particularly non-academics with a deep interest in history have sought out both information and community online. Whether on Civil War message boards, facebook community’s, blogs, or by following the Twitter feeds of those historians who Tweet, these folks have displayed an admirable interest in the pursuit of information. When academics purposely abandon the field, they should not complain if the info online comes up lacking.
Ironically, it was a comment by one of the readers of my blog on a facebook page that prompted me to write this second post on Earl Hess’s article. Jacob Selvia responded to my article yesterday about the decision of some academic historians to stay off of social media because they have encountered junk history online. Selvia wrote; “Well let me help them out: It’s not ever going away. Tell it like it is, or get buried under an avalanche of states’ rights-loving black confederate regiments, [and] benign slaveholders.” Just because half of historians don’t like the worst of the ‘net does not mean that they should surrender it to the crazies!
Now, I don’t want you to think that I am attacking “academic historians” here. Not at all. Nearly half of these Civil War experts do use social media in one way or another. I read great Twitter threads started by historians like Karen Cox and Megan Kate Nelsen. Keith Harris produces informative and educational podcasts in his role as The Rogue Historian. The blogging and facebook posts of Brooks Simpson and Kevin Levin have helped refine my thinking about the field. Nick Sacco gives great insights into interpreting history at hisotric sites. Victoria Bynum has helped me understand renegade Southerners. My friend Damien Shiels has been a constant source of inspiration with his blog Irish in the American Civil War. There are so many others who have helped me and influenced me over the last decade, that it would take an entire article just to list them all. I really appreciate the fact that they not only post info on their research, but that many of them have taken time out of their days to respond to my inquiries online.
Unfortunately, Hess’s article passes over most forms of social media. Historians on YouTube, Instagram, and podcasting platforms are pretty much ignored. There is a brief mention of Twitter. But most of the ire of the Anti-Social historians is directed against the blog Civil War Memory, written by Kevin Levin. Levin has written two books for university presses on how the Civil War is remembered. He has also contributed chapters to scholarly books and he edited a compilation of articles on how museums interpret the war, so he is recognized as having significant expertise.
Hess writes that one historian said:
“I used to read [a blog called] Civil War Memory occasionally, before it became all about self-promotion,” commented a respondent who preferred to remain anonymous. “I found it odd how that blog became something of a what to read and in the know site.”
It is funny that one of things academic historians object to about history on social media is the making of snarky comments by anonymous authors and that right here in a scholarly journal we see a snarky comment by an anonymous author! The criticism of Levin goes on for two full paragraphs. No other blogs are even mentioned. Perhaps that is because, as the bravely anonymous historian says, Civil War historians consider Civil War Memory the “in the know site.” But of course, none of them read it.
By the way Anonymous Academic Historian, if you don’t like Kevin Levin’s site, why not start your own?
Sometime next week I will put together my final thoughts on this article from the journal Civil War History. Until then, enjoy the weekend, but don’t read any blogs, Tweets, or facebook posts on history.
Follow Reconstruction Blog on Social Media:
Superb!
Whoa, Pat: I just had a flashback of Andy Rooney telling it like it was when Silly Season would take over the year. As you know, I am a blog reading Tweetin’ history junkie, so I don’t give a rats petutie what Hess, Guelzo, & Mr/Mz Anonymous thinks of social media. Not everything online is truthful, palatable, or even interesting, but like a fine restaurant, one must fine tune his/her social media menu and feast on the best it has to offer.
Finally, as a no-account-history-nobody (the kind that those internet haters wish to avoid), social media has opened the doors to splendid friendships and frenemy relationships that have blossomed over the years. I am sincerely indebted to these platforms.
“I asked how many copies of such a book were likely to be sold. The answer was ‘about a thousand.’ I laughed. Nearly all of my online The Immigrants’ Civil War writing gets more people reading it than that. My top article got more than 130,000 readers when it was first published, and a number of other articles got in the tens of thousands of readers.”
Your top article got 130,000 VIEWS. How many actually read the whole thing is another matter. Meanwhile, you might only sell 1,000 books but many of those go to libraries where they will be read or otherwise used by others. The book in print is also more permanent than anything on the internet.
I’m not suggesting the abandonment of the internet but I think print is still very important even if the surface numbers don’t make it obvious.
“How many read the whole thing?” Fair enough question. Of course, people often confess to me that they have many books on their shelves that they have never read, so the question goes both ways.
I am not denigrating books, by the way. As you may suspect, I read them constantly and at a fast pace.