Academics don't think Internet will ruin everything. That usually comes from people making the viral thing du jour. Academics tend to know actual history. As for the first versus popularizer—you're judging different games by the same standard. Different incentives.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @antoniogm @benthompson
What do you think is the game for (most) academics? It's not a job populated mostly by people trying to maximize their earnings or their public visibility. Anyone who can succeed in the tough academic job market could almost certainly make much more money some other way.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
I pretty strongly disagree w/ this. Academics at the PhD level feeding into the job market optimize for status within the hierarchy of their guild & the larger academy (but mostly guild). Some of these skills may translate to BigCos but in general I think they'd be eaten alive.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
But the point is: people who choose academia are often looking for something really different, and operate within a very different incentive structure. It has its own dysfunctions for sure and a terrible job market. But it's not some last choice of the desperate.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @jonst0kes and
If anything, if the job market wasn't this terrible, you'd see so many more people flock to it. It's very competitive in its own way exactly because that. Not too many is really "stuck" there; people with good jobs fought tooth-and-nail to get them exactly because it's different.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Henry Farrell
What he’s saying.https://twitter.com/henryfarrell/status/1305895775877107717 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.