- Editors' Introduction
"The revolution will not be tweeted"—or so contends Malcolm Gladwell in a recent New Yorker piece. Perhaps Gladwell has a point, particularly in his specific argument critiquing what he sees as an overly determined link between activism and social media, but as journal editors, we find the sounds of upheaval accompanying the merging of technology and publishing these days have risen from a twitter to a roar. Every day brings not only new reports of the imminent death of books and the ascendancy of digital replacements, such as the iPad and Kindle, but also real questions about the way forward in the world of academic journals. And, while such noises are certainly not new, the decibels do seem to be growing ever louder. As we think about our own textual presence, we're interested in understanding more how our readers are experiencing this particular corner of the revolutionary landscape.
Pedagogy came onto the scene a decade ago just as the transition from print to digital was moving into full gear. At the same time, accounts in media such as the Chronicle of Higher Education were reporting that libraries—under severe financial pressures—were canceling journal subscriptions or replacing print subscriptions with e-only access. The rise of aggregators like JSTOR, Project Muse, and more recently, Duke University Press's own e-Duke Journals Scholarly Collections, and the attendant rise in desktop computing power by scholars has made full-text electronic delivery of journal contents not just possible but expected.
In a climate like this, then, subscription rates become almost meaningless as indicators of a journal's impact. In fact, we have begun relying [End Page 245] more heavily on usage statistics which reflect data such as the numbers of downloaded articles. Under such a system of value, one wonders how long the traditional print version of journals will continue. So we're curious to learn from you, our readers, how you access Pedagogy. In print? Through an e-aggregator? Some combination thereof? What drives your practice?
Then, too, we're curious to know not only how you access the journal but what you access: Do you refer to the table of contents any longer? Or do the articles you read find their way to you directly from a database? If the latter, we wonder if anyone reads editors' introductions anymore—or are these relics of the disappearing print culture?
Finally, we'd love to hear what would be desirable in an online presence. What kind of extra content do you think would be most helpful? What kind of content should be avoided? We're mindful of the challenges of being online—things that Jennifer Howard terms "link rot and footnote flight"—but we believe that together we can continue to develop Pedagogy as a vibrant resource for teachers in every corner of our discipline.
We look forward to reading your ideas at firstname.lastname@example.org. And however you read us, we're grateful.