Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
That kind of stuff - more a lesson than an argument - is a hard sell for an editor at a newspaper or magazine. And I write at a length and depth that you just aren't going to get on most platforms. Standard op-ed columns tend to have word-limits around 1200 or so. 7/12
And few academics are sufficiently famous to be able to ignore that and do whatever they like and get it printed. My average post runs around 5,500 words and that includes Firesides, Gap weeks, etc. The really substantive posts, I'd guess, average closer to 10k words. 8/12
So having my own platform lets me develop these topics in a way that I couldn't if I was exclusively writing a column for this or that (though, again, outreach through existing platforms is important and I do that too). 9/12
What I try most to avoid is simplified, click-baity history, the sort of 'oh neat' but fundamentally shallow stuff you see (often by non-historians) on the internet. Instead, my goal is to write things with some analytical heft, with some substance. 10/12
And then to take that, which hopefully has some real history-food, not just cotton-candy fluff, to as wide an audience as possible. And given that goal, I think it is fair to have a little celebration about reaching that audience and doing some history with them. 11/12
Addendum: Rereading this, I think I maybe sound too harsh about the advice I got at the beginning. This is not to bash on that scholar or the advice - it was good advice, helpfully offered, by someone who has more than done their bit in the public-facing scholarship space.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
