Demos Greenhouse has a post today that nicely encapsulates the power of blogs and networking online – and the disadvantages of it, seen from the point of view of a thinktank of political activists and researchers (“people changing politics”)who have only recently decided to focus on the net. The upsides are things I’ve seen happen in many other blogs, and they really are quite startling, especially the first time they happen to you – you know, when the person you’ve blogged about comments on your post defending his or her point of view, or when someone you didn’t know emails you forging some useful connection that wouldn’t have happened by simple person-to-person networking. The risks are less often pointed out:

To put it bluntly, I won’t get a byline for the THES article; Demos won’t be seen by the rest of the world as any more influential even though one of Europe’s leading statesman takes the time to read and comment on our blog.

The online and offline “public spheres” don’t always connect. Acquiring influence in one doesn’t necessarily give you recognition in the other. I think this will even out in time, as we spend more and more time with online media. Though perhaps we’ll have to wait until print newspapers have digital paper and links to make connections back to their sources, like mainstream online papers are doing now.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

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 […]