What Live-Tweeting Means To Me

via Sue Waters

I know the very last thing the interwebs needs is another post discussing what some have dubbed #Twittergate (how the mind reels at such creative nomenclature), yet that is exactly what I find myself writing this morning.  The reason?  I think it's important someone steps forward and explains, in a non-patronizing tone, just why live-tweeting conference presentations, or really any live event where ideas are exchanged, is so vital to people like me.  You see, I'm a former graduate student who now finds himself working as an 'independent researcher' (again, a rose by any other name).  Live-tweeting was the lifeline that kept me connected to current ideas being exchanged in conferences I couldn't afford to attend, in addition to giving me the ability to build a professional network that, quite honestly, my department never really never could help me cultivate.  That's not a knock on my former department- it's just the reality for many graduate students that networking comes easiest to those who can travel and stay on top of current trends, a process that is often self-fulfilling as only those who can afford to pursue these things have increased access to their sustained returns.  If you're shut out of the loop, you can grow quite lonely on the outside looking in.

Not located next to a major metropolitan center?  Good luck finding cheap airfares or affording increasing hotel prices.  Are your department's coffers running low?  Good luck receiving help to pay for conference visits.  Since we all know how competitive the academic job market can be, graduate students need every bit of help they can muster as every line on the CV is scrutinized by hiring committees.  If you can't attend conferences and build your experience in giving presentations and asking questions, well, good luck getting a job.

Now Twitter can't replace actual conference attendance and actual presentations given in front of an audience of one's peers.  But it can make you a meaningful participant in such presentations, and it can give you access to people's work that otherwise would be denied.  From my own experience, this can be a valuable proxy in lieu of physical presence.  It can even lead to you having a physical presence in said conferences.

Last April, I attended the Theorizing the Web 2012 conference where I presented on 'textual dualism' in Russian history.  It was an incredible forum where diverse disciplines gathered to debate ideas that were fresh while tackling new issues digital culture brings to our daily lives.  How did I know about this conference?  Twitter.  Specifically, I was able to connect with one of the organizers, Nathan Jurgenson, through my engagement with his ideas discussed on Twitter.  Chances are, on my own, I would never have encountered Nathan's ideas.  I wouldn't have met his co-organizer, PJ Rey, and I certainly would not have been exposed to the sociological debate they both pursue (among many other talented contributors) on their Cyborgology blog.  I can't say the cross-pollination of ideas between us has been equal- I can only say that I, personally, have benefitted greatly from engaging with debates and ideas both Jurgenson and Rey and so many others contribute to their Twitter accounts and academic blog posts.

This past summer one of my blog posts, 'Going Beyond the Textual in History', was selected for publication in the Journal of Digital Humanities (JDH).  This was my first article published in a peer-reviewed journal, a minor, yet important, stepping stone in building my larger academic career.  How did my work come to the attention of the JDH?  Twitter.  Specifically, other followers in my Twitter network saw my tweet about my post and retweeted it to others, a process that eventually put my work in front of the editors of the JDH and netted me a spot in their summer volume.  The thing is, I'm not a well known voice on topics of gaming and history.  Without my Twitter network, the ideas I wrote about in my post would most likely have been seen by a few friends and maybe even a few professionals who shared my interests- but that would have probably been the extent of it.  To be honest, without Twitter I wouldn't have come across the original journal article which inspired my blog post in the first place.

I realize that some people have reservations with their conference presentations being tweeted to the larger world.  I don't understand their fear, the idea that they might have their thoughts stolen and used by others in a more advanced position to publish work in a peer-reviewed journal, or that the ideas presented represented a work-in-progress and not one's final analysis worthy of announcement.  As a Humanities practitioner, I believe the process of one's work is as valuable as the work itself.  Still, I can understand why someone would demur on such publicity.

However, what I want those who rally against live-tweeting to understand is just how important having access to ideas can be for someone in my position.  I may not have Ivy league credentials, or be a member of good standing in the PhD club- but I can hold my own and even give something back to discussions that tread on what I've researched or read about.  Many others can too- but only if they are let in on the process.  Are there questions regarding proper citation and attribution when using Twitter?  Of course.  But just because the format is nascent in 'serious & credible discussion' (a point which I'm not sure applies anymore to tweets in general) doesn't mean we should ban or obstruct their use in furthering discourse.  Because of Twitter, I can participate in conferences hundreds of miles away, learn about new articles or books that fit my area of research, find new ways to combine ideas into something greater than the sum of its parts, feel like my efforts are worth a damn, meet new and interesting people- all while making connections to other scholars and fields that just isn't possible when you live in one town and research in one library.

That's what live-tweeting means to me.