The buzz has died down, but I thought I’d respond to some comments on the last post about the perils of academic blogging.

First, I should probably point out that I’m in a safe situation, with a permanent position in a good University (which I got well before I started this blog).

Finally, Jerry correctly points out that “Academic Freedom” doesn’t imply that we get to say anything we want — it is incumbent upon us to show “appropriate restraint”. Indeed, the problem with Tribble’s hiring committee is not that they used the candidates’ blogs as part of the vetting process — of course our public words should indeed be considered. No, the problem is that, on the scant evidence given in the article, the bloggers were rejected for things they hadn’t done, but might, or just for speaking out at all. This is exactly the opposite of academic freedom.

So now, blogging is just yet another supposedly irrelevant piece of information (like, say, being female, or not getting your PhD from a prestigious University) that can actively work against you