On 10/16/14 3:17 PM, t byfield wrote:
Again, Morozov should've done a better job of crediting Medina's work, and
everyone should have been more attentive to the gender aspects. But too
many critics have batted around quantitative-lite factoids -- how many
paragraphs, how many mentions, how many years they've been reading the _New
Yorker_, etc. This shows just how much of the kerfuffle boils down to
accounting (and rules-based accounting at that). It's no mystery why. Every
academic knows that citations are the coin of the land and the key to the
kingdom: renewal, promotion, tenure. So citations, apart from their
bibliographic function, also have a
social-economic function, like likes, or @mentions, or excellent
employment reviews.
Unlike the purloined letter, which fails to arrive at its intended
destination, and continues in an arterial circulation, unread, the
purloined idea, lacking citation, fails to regress infinitely towards
its real origin, and its genealogy ends prematurely, interrupting its
veinal return. And it is read.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
