King George III Would Be Proud: Historian Humor

Funny moment: Yesterday, my cell phone rang while I sat in a waiting room. Normally, I keep my phone on vibrate, but for whatever reason its ringer was turned on.

Like many early American historians, I love the soundtrack to [simpleazon-link asin="B013JLBPGE" locale="us"]Hamilton the Musical[/simpleazon-link]. My ringer plays the "Silence! A message from the King!" lyric at the end of Samuel Seabury's "Farmer Refuted."

When my phone rang, everyone in the waiting room jumped a bit because I had a "message from the king."

After I shut the ringer off, I imagined King George III smiling about the fact that he could make a room full of Bostonians jump more than 200 years after the British Army left Boston and the United States declared its independence.

"Farmer Refuted," Hamilton the Musical

King George III's Message: "You'll Be Back," Hamilton the Musical

5 Tips for How to Start a Writing Group Plus The Origins of #BookSquad

Do you have a community of writers you can rely on to push you to meet deadlines and write the best books and articles possible? In this post, you will discover how to start a writing group and the origins of my writing group, #BookSquad.

Origins of #BookSquad

One of my big goals for 2015 was to finish my book: America’s First Gateway: Albany and the Making of America.

I have lofty, but achievable (I think) goals for my book. I want America’s First Gateway to be a well-researched, well-written, and accessible book. It should speak to both my colleagues and non-historians.

#BookSquad came about because I need help accomplishing these goals. I need to be around writers who can lend perspective to my project and who will set and hold me accountable for deadlines.

Starting a Writing Group: How #BookSquad Came Together

I expressed my desire to start a writing group to Megan Kate Nelson, a friend and fellow historian. I told her how I wanted the group to be an in-person workshop with a focus on writing well-researched, accessible history books. Megan loved the idea and suggested that we invite Kevin Levin to join us. He accepted our invitation.

Not long after I spoke with Megan and Kevin, I had lunch with Heather Cox Richardson. We met to discuss digital public history; Heather is a co-founder of the fantastic digital history magazine We’re History. During our conversation, I mentioned how I was starting a writing group with Megan and Kevin. Heather asked if she could join us and suggested that we invite Seth Jacobs, her colleague at Boston College, too.

Within a week or two, I had found four historians who shared my writing goals and who wanted to participate in a group where we could help each other achieve them. As I reflected upon my good fortune, I realized that our group consisted of one historian of early America (me), three historians of the Civil War Era (Megan, Kevin, and Heather), and one historian specializing in twentieth-century United States diplomatic history (Seth). This felt unbalanced so I invited Sara Georgini to join us.

Sara works as an Assistant Editor at the Adams Papers Documentary Editing Project. Although she trained as an historian of 19th-century American religion, her work with the Adams Papers has provided her with a great command of the historiographies for both early America and early 20th-century United States history. She also interacts with members of the public on a regular basis.

Our first meeting took place at Heather’s house in June 2015. We met over dinner and used the meeting as a chance to get to know each other. We also established the format for our group: monthly meetings; dinner, drink, and socializing first; writing workshop during dessert. This format works well for us. We socialize for the first 60-90 minutes of our meeting and then spend the next 60-90 minutes having a frank conversation about one member’s workshop submission.

After our first meeting, we gained two more members and our name, #BookSquad. Nina Silber (historian of the Civil War Era) asked to join us after seeing Megan post about our first meeting on Facebook. Tom Thurston (historian of 20th-century United States History) asked to join after seeing Heather post about a subsequent meeting. Sara dubbed us #BookSquad in her Facebook post, which we adopted and, for whatever reason, always write as a hashtag.

5 Tips for How to Form a Writing Group

1. Define your goals: What do you want to accomplish with your writing and what do you want to get out of working with a writing group?

You need answers to these questions so you can find likeminded writers and get the most out of your writing group.

2. Find likeminded people: The best writing groups consist of writers who work on similar genres and who share similar goals.

The needs of a poet differ from those of an historian. In my experience (#BookSquad is my fourth writing group), it helps when you work with people who work on similar genres. This doesn’t mean that everyone in your group needs to be an historian, but you may find it helpful if everyone in your group has a serious, non-fiction project so you can assist each other with research and methodology questions.

In terms of where to find potential members, start with your personal network. Once you figure out what type of writing group you want to form or join, ask your friends and colleagues whether they have or would like to join a group like you described.

3. Meet regularly: Find a schedule that works for you.

Whether you form a virtual writing group or an in-person writing group, be sure you meet regularly. Regular meetings will help you stay motivated and accountable when it comes to achieving your writing goals.

4. Find balance between project similarity and diversity: Work with people you wouldn’t normally work with.

As an early American historian, I don’t often engage with the historiography of the Civil War or twentieth century. In fact, I haven’t really engaged with these historiographies since I passed my comps in 2007.

Being in a group with so many mid-to-late 19th-century specialists can be both daunting and interesting. When one of the 19th-century historians workshops a chapter, the majority of the group starts in on whether the chapter addressed the important and recent works in their field. They also nitpick facts. This is fun to watch and I learn a lot, but Seth, Tom, and I cannot help our friends on the same level.

Instead, we tell them where we didn’t understand something because we are not so well versed in the historiography or where there is a similar example in early American or twentieth-century U.S. history that they might find helpful. These outside perspectives prove useful when workshopping the chronology and structure of a chapter.

5. Create a safe workshop environment: Writing is a personal activity; you present your thoughts and ideas for the world to consider. Be sure you join or start a writing group that creates a safe, honest, and respectful place for workshopping members' writing.

#BookSquad has created a safe and homey workshop space: We meet around the dinner table.

The person who submitted their work hosts the meeting at their house and cooks the main course. Every member brings an appetizer, side dish, and/or bottle of wine to add to the meal. We share food, personal stories, and conversation around the table. When we are done eating, we clear the table and sit down to work.

Our workshop is friendly, but intense. We have a respectful, but honest conversation about the submitted chapter. We discuss historiography, structure, and writing style. The nature of writing makes the workshop personal, but the social hour beforehand helps us remember that we are all friends offering advice that will make the offered chapter better.

Conclusion

Writing groups will help you improve your writing and help you increase your productivity. However, a good writing can be hard to find. Sometimes finding the right group involves trying out several different groups before you find the right one. You may also need patience while you seek out members for your ideal group.

Unfortunately, I will not meet my goal of finishing America's First Gateway in 2015. However, with the motivation and accountability provided by #BookSquad, I am confident I will make significant progress between now and the end of 2016.

Share Your Story

Do you belong to a writing group? How did you find it? What genres do its members write?

Trends in Digital Communications

I have been monitoring a few trends in digital communications. In this post, I will discuss what I have noticed, where I think it is all going, and why historians should care.

General Observations

 

Digital communications has entered a “Wild West” period. Digital audio, video, and magazines have been around long enough that people know how to start and produce content for them. Today, the focus is not on content creation, but on how to monetize digital media.

There are four major players driving digital media monetization trends: Traditional media networks, digital media networks, internet entrepreneurs, and consumers.

Consumers want to locate high-quality, digital content that interests them quickly and reliably. Traditional media networks, digital media networks, and internet entrepreneurs aim to service this consumer demand by providing high-quality, easy-to-find, niche content to consumers as part of membership/subscription programs.

The future of digital media is content curation and bundling.[1]

Rise and Proliferation of Podcast Networks

At a casual glance, the world of podcasts might seem like a free-for-all. In fact, consolidation has begun.

The number of podcast networks has exploded over the last year.

A few of these networks developed out of traditional media such as the NPR podcast network. The majority have their roots in digital communications such as Panoply (Slate), Rainmaker.FM (Copyblogger), and Earwolf (Midroll). Others had a hybrid birth: Radiotopia and Gimlet began as digital networks, but their founders came from NPR.

Networks allow participants to cross-promote member shows to audience members who already enjoy one or two shows within that network. As a result, shows within a network tend to grow large audiences.

Additionally, networks offer bundled ad buys to advertisers. Ad revenue proceeds do not always divide equally. The network takes significant cut for maintenance and advertising fees and shows with larger audiences receive higher percentages than shows with smaller audiences.

More Players Enter the Digital Audio Game

Competition has been stiff in the realm of digital video.

Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu all offer original video content. YouTube stands as the second largest search engine and internet video producers have started to hyper-specialize in the content they produce to stand out on the platform.

The same has not been the case for audio.

Apple has dominated the podcast market.

As of July 2015, 82 percent of all podcast listeners listened on an iPhone. iTunes and the Apple Podcasts App account for more than 50 percent of all podcast downloads. The closest competitor to iTunes has been Stitcher Radio, which supplies approximately 2.5 percent of all podcast downloads.

However, Apple is about to experience serious competition to its near monopoly as a gateway to digital audio.

During the last 4-6 months, more digital media companies have either entered or have made strides to enter the digital audio market.

In May 2015, Spotify released a beta program to curate podcast content. Since June, the company has hand selected podcasts to include in its service and each month it expands its podcast offerings for its beta user group.

On October 27, 2015, Google announced its reentry into podcasts. Google Play Audio is now accepting submissions for its Google Play Music podcast directory.

On November 2, 2015, Pandora revealed that it will be the “exclusive streaming partner” for season 2 of Serial, the most popular podcast to date.

Amazon stands as the only major player that has not announced a plan to incorporate podcasts into its media offerings.

Membership Has its Privileges

Smaller podcast (audio and video) networks have begun to mimic their large counterparts. Just as Google Play Music, Amazon Prime, Spotify, Pandora, Apple, and Netflix compete to offer unique content to their subscribers, internet entrepreneurs and digital media networks have begun to create membership programs.

Panoply (Slate) offers Slate Plus. $50 per year gets you access to all content on the Slate website and extra, members-only premium content.

Gimlet Media is pivoting to the membership model too. Listeners who support the network at $60/year receive a t-shirt and access to behind-the-scenes content.

Radiotopia also offers swag for listeners who subscribe to its monthly donation options. However, listeners who subscribe at the $20/month or $300/year level also get the chance to participate in developing and choosing new talent and shows for the network.

Out in Right Field: Live-Stream Video

This next trend has nothing to do with the consolidation and bundling trends noted above. At least not yet.

Live-stream video is growing in popularity. Millions of people love to watch live video of people doing everything from surfing to delivering a talk on how to save money on your taxes.

People love live-stream video for three reasons: First, it's authentic. Whereas people can stage how they present themselves through static social media posts or edited videos, they can’t hide who they are while streaming live video.

Second, they love live-stream video because it is interactive. Platforms like Periscope, Meerkat, Blab.im, and Google On Air Hangouts allow viewers to interact with the person streaming the video. Viewers can ask questions, offer suggestions, and either harass or support the person streaming in real time.

Third, I suspect people also enjoy live-stream video because of the schadenfreude they feel when they watch someone mess up in front of a live audience.

Why Historians Should Care About Digital Communications Trends

Historians need to be aware of these trends as we consider how best to communicate our work in digital media.

For the moment, I am watching these trends to see which ones have staying power. I suspect that the consolidation and bundling of digital media into networks and subscription platforms is just getting started.

I do not think this movement to curate content as a subscription or membership service will spell the end for independent digital content producers, but when this trend finishes, it will make it significantly harder for independent producers to attract attention and build an audience. After all, the trend is about making it easier for potential readers, listeners, and viewers to find reliable, high-quality content that interests them.

Above, I noted four major players driving this trend. There might be a fifth player shortly: Universities.

At the moment, universities are focused on turning traditional ideas into digital media: They record course lectures and make them available via digital audio or video. This approach is inside-the-box thinking and doesn’t always translate into great digital content.

With that said, there are university departments producing native video, audio, and text content for blogs and podcasts.

The University of Texas-Austin History Department stands out. Check out their blog Not Even Past and the 15 Minute History podcast. UT-Austin history professors and graduate students produce blog and podcast content specifically for each media type. Additionally, although UT-Austin professors and grad students produce all of the content, their media does not reek of self-promotion.

As universities become more involved in digital communications, I can’t help but wonder if digital education communications networks will form, whether they will form along athletic conference lines, and whether they will charge for the content they create and curate.

Will the bonds that tie the BigTen conference schools together extend to a future scholarly digital communications network?

I don’t know, but it would be powerful if it happens. Especially as the BigTen could advertise its scholarly digital communications network on its traditional television network.

When universities decide to develop digital media content that goes beyond the lecture hall, it will make it more difficult for scholarly digital media produced outside academic institutions to thrive. It may be the outlets such as Ben Franklin’s World, The Junto Blog, and We’re History will continue to prosper because of their longevity. But, new scholarly digital content producers will face a significant challenge as they seek to build an audience for their work.

[1] Bundling involves marketing, packaging, and offering two or more like products or services for one price. A good example of this would be Amazon Prime. The subscription service offers 2-day shipping, video and music streaming, and other services for one, annual membership fee.

Initial Blueprint for a Digital History Communications Lab

For the last year or so, my brain has been formulating ideas for a digital history communications lab. This post represents my first attempt to articulate and sketch out what my brain envisions.

Note on terminology: I use “scholarly history” as a stand in for well-researched historical projects. These projects include traditional articles and monographs as well as museum exhibits or other new media projects.

Digital History Communications Lab Services Two Needs

1. Convenient Public Access to Scholarly History

People love history and if granted convenient access to historians and their work they will become advocates for history and its study.

Presently, a divide exists between historians and non-historians. People who love history want to consume high-quality historical scholarship, but they settle for "history-lite” books and programs because that is what they can conveniently access.

The Digital History Communications Lab will produce high-quality digital platforms that make scholarly history conveniently available to non-historians. Additionally, the lab will create programs that foster a sense of community and interaction between those who consume this content and the historians who contributed to its production.

2. Resource Center for Historians Who Want to Learn and Perfect Digital Communication

The Digital History Communications Lab will serve as an information hub for historians who want to learn how to communicate their work via digital means.

The Lab will curate content about social and new media and offer suggestions for how historians might adapt these platforms and tools to communicate their work. It will also offer how-to tutorials for digital platforms, social networks, and tools such as WordPress, Twitter, Facebook, etc. Tutorials will provide both basic and advanced instruction in an effort to serve the skill levels of all historians. Private consulting will be an option.

Some universities offer digital education resources for faculty and staff, but sometimes faculty and staff members feel uncomfortable seeking help because it means they have to admit their digital illiteracy in a public way. The resources of the digital history communications lab will use the anonymous feeling of the internet to allow those who want to learn, but feel embarrassed about seeking in-person help, to access the help they need on the web. The Lab's tutorials and resources will be available to all historians, regardless of affiliation.

Additionally, the Digital History Communications Lab will support experimentation with new forms of scholarly communications. It will not only offer assistance in producing audio and visual podcasts, multimedia blogs, exhibits, and apps, but it will also offer a space where scholars can produce their projects. Think a digital communications makers' space.

Digital History Communications Lab Public Outreach Network

Ben Franklin’s World represents just one of my ideas for how scholars can communicate scholarly history to a wide audience. I have ideas for more podcasts, audio and visual, as well as how historians can use the new emerging technologies of virtual and augmented realities.

The Digital History Communications Lab will serve as a leader in digital history communications. It will present the best-of-the-best projects. Its content will set a high standard that will help the public understand that scholarly history is accessible and easy to consume.

The Lab's in-house projects will be part of a network that cross-promotes its other projects and projects that meet its high, quality standards; word-of-mouth recommendation serves as the best way to attract new audience members. Production quality matters, although the Digital History Communications Lab will offer space to historians who wish to create a project, not all projects produced in its space will become a member of its network.

Conclusion

My thoughts about the Digital History Communications Lab are still preliminary, but they are maturing. If you have feedback, I would love to read it.

What excites me most about this concept is that it helps serve both society and the profession. It allows historians to produce and convey historical scholarship and enables non-historians to grapple with history and historical thinking in new and different ways-- ways that have become more natural for them than books.

I have thought about how I will fund this venture. It involves several different revenue streams.

What Are Your Strengths?

What character attributes make you "you" and good at what you do? Lately, I have fielded a lot of questions about what I am doing with my digital history scholarship, my career, and my future. These questions have made me turn inward and ask: How do I articulate who I am, why I am good at what I do, and where I am going with my work?

As an avid podcast listener (I am a podcast junkie), I have heard many business podcasters mention the Gallup [simpleazon-link asin="159562015X" locale="us"]StrengthsFinder 2.0[/simpleazon-link] book and test. Based upon psychologist Donald O. Clifton's 40-years of research, StrengthsFinder 2.0 helps people recognize and better articulate their strengths of character.

The test consists of numerous questions that each taker must answer in 20 seconds or less. The whole test takes about 30 minutes to complete. The 2.0 part of the test involves the computer, which takes your answers, compares them with 34 of the most common strengths, and then produces a report that shows you your top 5 strengths and articulates what they mean for most people.

Admittedly, I was skeptical: Could a single test and computer algorithm tell me about my character? Could it help me articulate the essence of what makes me unique?

Much to my surprise the answer is "yes." The test articulated why I am obsessed with history, driven to succeed, and why I become discontented if I don't have some idea or problem to turn over in my head.

My Top 5 Strengths

1. Context: "You look back to understand the present...It is only by casting your mind back to an earlier time, a time when the plans were being drawn up, that the present regains stability...you make better decisions because you sense the underlying structure."

I guess this explains why I love history and why I became a historian.

2. Learner: "Whatever the subject, you will always be drawn to the process of learning. The process, more than the content or the result, is especially exciting for you...You thrive in dynamic work environments where you are asked...to learn a lot about new subject matter in a short period of time."

This makes sense. I prefer to hang out with brilliant people and I often seek to learn new skills, ideas, and technologies.

3. Achiever: "Achiever describes a constant need for achievement...By the end of the day you must achieve something tangible in order to feel good about yourself. And by "every day" you mean every single day--workdays, weekends, vacations....After each accomplishment is reached, the fire dwindles for a moment, but very soon it rekindles itself, forcing you toward the next accomplishment."

Honestly, I am shocked "achiever" didn't score number 2. I feel like I need to work all the time; I am happiest when I am working.

Before I took this test, someone asked me to describe my ability to accomplish all that I do. I compared myself to a racehorse. At first I stand in the starting gate starting down the field. This is my planning mode. I figure out what I need to do and how I am going to do it. Once I devise my plan of action, I bolt out of the open gate and run at full speed until I reach my goal. After I reach the finish line, I get back in the gate to run a different race.

via GIPHY 

4. Individualization: "Your Individualization theme leads you to be intrigued by the unique qualities of each person. You are impatient with generalization or "types"...you instinctively observe each person's style, each person's motivation, how each thinks, and how each person builds relationships...Because you are such a keen observer of other person's strengths, you can draw out the best in each person."

Individualization combined with my "Learner" strength articulates why I lead a rich interdisciplinary life; why I am a hybrid historian. I enjoy spending time with diverse groups of people. I appreciate how they have different interests from me. I may not always agree with their ideas, but I value them.

5. Analytical: "You Analytical theme challenges other people: "Prove it. Show me why what you are claiming is true"...You see yourself as objective and dispassionate. You like data because they are value free...Armed with these data, you search for patterns and connections. You want to understand how certain patterns affect one another."

I see patterns. I make connections. I devise plans to make patterns and connections that need to be made. My analytical side is my skeptical side. The side that requires me to craft strong, cogent and evidence-based arguments. My "Analytical" strength often works with my "Context" strength. This collaboration is why I sometimes get lost among the trees of a project.

Conclusion

Knowing more about my inherent strengths has helped me better understand and articulate who I am, why I am drawn to the projects I undertake, and why I will always be pursuing new projects.

Have you taken the test or a similar one? What are your strengths of character?