1. 0
  1.  

  2. 4

    Flagged as spam because the article is confused, makes grand claims to be backed by research that is never cited, and ends with an advertisement for the author’s book.

    1. 2

      Huh. Odd reading, I guess. The author is an assistant professor of media studies and is in the midst of writing the book. Ending with an advertisement for an author’s other work is pretty commonplace these days and it came across as sincere to me.

      I don’t think the article is confused at all. I thought it was pretty clear in its examples, drawing parallels to political and social institutions. The in-progress book is full of references. It really seems like an academic putting some reasonably well thought out ideas for consideration in an era of social science academics that practically demands you have a public presence to get tenure.

      1. 2

        You’ve mixed together a bunch of concepts. Having examples isn’t the same thing as citing to sources for those examples. The author needing a web presence is not the same thing as this being a great article.