I got the final reader reports for my Blogging book back last week, and have till next Wednesday to completely finish up the manuscript. With the manuscript completed by Christmas, my lovely editor Andrea Drugan figures we can get all the bits of the copy-editing and proofing that I need to be involved in finished before the baby’s here in April, which would certainly be a Very Good Thing. The idea of having two or three weeks to go through a copy-edited manuscript with a tiny baby needing constant attention is not at all appealing. Also, this means the book’s highly likely to come out on schedule, in the autumn of 2008.

There are of course lots of suggestions for changes in the manuscript (did you ever read a manuscript or book that you wouldn’t have written differently yourself?), but the reader reports are mostly very positive, which is great! And there are some tweaks that’ll be good improvements, too, which is great.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

1 Comment

  1. […] I’ve got two more days to finish up the final version of the manuscript for my book Blogging, and it’s going pretty well. And look, the cover is ready! The book is part of a series called Digital Media and Society, and so the books have a uniform sort of look, with the grey, black and white and the rain of zeroes and ones. Andrea, my wonderful editor at Polity asked whether I had any particular ideas for the cover image, and when I asked Scott he suggested a megaphone, which is what the designer has chosen to use. I think it looks great – I like the semi-see-throughness a lot. And it looks a bit like a steering wheel, which you know, I’m the navigator of my blog, that sort of fits, though I’ve no idea if the designer intended that. […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]