Symposium Notes

2019 Symposium Journal Session notes:

# NEPH symposium notes

## Journal
– Public
– The Public Historian
– JSTOR Daily
– Magazine of the National Endowment for the Humanities
– The New Yorker
– The Atlantic
– LA Review of books
– Imagining America
– Raritan
– The Contingent
– Digital Commons (they died very quickly)
– Borrowers and Lenders
– Sequitor
– Journal of Interactive Pedagogy

Explainer for the explainers.
General public. Accessible in language and style. Speedy.

JSTOR Daily – Breadth, not depth.

– Humanities scholarship for public readers
– Art, creative writing “non scholarly modes”
– Articles about civic engagement

Past and present.

Online publication – peer reviewed. Nimble.

Quarterly. Of the moment, open access.
“Fire and Footnotes”

“Attacks on facts”
“A tax on facts”
“A tax on fax”

### From the group
– not only pessimism! The news is “depressing.”
– *Contingent Magazine* Crowd funded. Recent mediaevalist publication. Why not ask members to publish in existing networks rather than make something new? Aggregator model?
– *Longform* has some aggregation happening.
– How it would it compare to *Imagining America*?
– Peer review in terms of Content *and* Style
– more like building a network and brand around Public Humanities?
– How do you compete with Vox? Politico? Newsmagazine? Other sites who are doing it at scale and paying quality scholars to do long form?
– Scalar? WordPress? Manifold? Proof of concept? Prototype?
– “could be after the colon” Should it be *called* Public Humanities?
– a lot of these journals come along with an organization
– Format? Multi-format? Both written and multi-media? Public Humanities and Digital Humanities? What a peer review process for the Digital Humanities look like? Model it for digital humanities work.
– “the indelicate question has to be asked” 3-400