As a young(ish) economist, I frequently worry about whether blogging is positive, neutral, or negative for one’s professional standing. Three recent sets of writings take differing views.
- In an IEA discussion paper, Daniel Klein emphasises the professional cost of participating in policy debates for economists (the paper is directed at libertarians, but it might as well be written for all economists).
- By contrast, a recent discussion on academic blogging argues that it can be good for one’s academic reputation. The contributors are mostly historians and philosophers.
- Meanwhile, John Quiggin discusses the ways in which blogging has broadened his interests; though he doesn’t say much about how it’s affected his academic work.