Popularity Report
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
URL Tag Cloud
Groups (1)
Bookmark History
Saved by 36 people (10 private), first by anonymouse user on 2006-06-12
- Rogers571 on 2008-09-16 - Tags education , books , technology , knowledge , site , future
- Campanam on 2008-07-03 - Tags books , blog , book , future , education , publishing , media , reading
- Bleiva2003 on 2008-06-17 - Tags blog , books , digital , ePublish
- Historian on 2008-05-17 - Tags Blogs , Unimportant , blogs
- Nonintia on 2008-04-07 - Tags Bookmarks Bar , USUL , Blog , Words_book_poliburo
Public Sticky notes
That, then (if you'll forgive the egregious over-simplification), is the model of what and who an 'author' is. We've been stuck with it pretty much since then. It depends on the immutable, printed page, requires authors to turn themselves into a brand in order to make a living by marketing their branded 'great' prose to the great unwashed for – of course – the improvement not of the authors but of said unwashed, and supports a whole industry in the production and sale of books.
And then came the Internet. All of a sudden, writing is infinitely reproducible. Anyone who wants to write can self-publish. There are tools for real-time collaborative writing. And yet the popular conception of who or what an Author is still very much alive, in the popular mind at least. The publishing industry, meanwhile, has responded to the threat posed by the Net by consolidating, automating, and producing only books guaranteed to sell millions.
Highlighted by mikeheth
Here are just a few:
- Access to source documents can be much more extensive free of the size, space and copyright constraints of cd-rom
- Dynamic comment fields enable classes to have their unique editions, where a lively conversation can take place in the margins.
- A continuously evolving text, as the authors add new findings in their work and engage in back and forth with "readers" who have begun to learn history by "doing history", and have begun both to question the authors’ conclusions and to suggest new sources and alternative syntheses. Bingo! That last one leads to . . . .
Highlighted by rogers571
Highlighted by rogers571
Highlighted by arneolav
Highlighted by arneolav


Public Comment
on 2006-06-12 by ajp-diigo
on 2006-10-10 by davidhowardrose
on 2006-12-01 by jlesage