next »

[squiddude]

Hello, I am a sock puppet for a regular poster.  I'm not sure it this is the correct place to post this except that it has to do with a conference presentation.

I recently Googled my name (should always be careful about this) and found myself on a professor’s blog that said some rather unkind things about a conference paper I delivered some time ago.  Now, I hold no ill-will towards the blog author: I am ashamed to admit that this presentation was not my best work – the panel was well out of my area of expertise (first mistake), I didn’t fact-check enough, my thoughts were not as clearly stated as I meant them to be, and my theoretical framework was much weaker than I would have liked (all the regular excuses: teaching, preparing articles, etc.) – so if anyone flames me for these admissions I will simply accept with bowed head.

I am now trying to make good out of bad and prepare the article for submission.  Obviously, a conference paper that goes over poorly needs serious reconsideration before submitting to peer-review for publication, but that is part of why we do conferences, and I honestly believe the blogger did not take into consideration some legitimate and new ideas I had.  My ideas could work, in other words, and I am seriously considering the critiques I found online.

I am worried, however, that – should an editor or a job search member Google me in the future – this site may come up.  Has anyone ever been in a situation like this?  Would it be appropriate to contact the professor (email and affiliation are on the blog site) and politely ask hu to re-consider a newer version of the paper?  Or does it matter?  I seriously doubt that anyone has read the blog and the review of my work is rather short, but I still worry about the professional effect it might have.

Any opinions or experiences would be welcome.  Thanks.

[bibliothecula]

I'd email and ask him to take down his comments. If he's nasty about it, you can waft  "libel" around and see what happens.

[seejanewrite]

Maybe this is a discipline related issue, but much (most?) scholarly work in the humanities (okay, in English) seems to come out of disagreement/conflict with another person's work.  I'm happy when someone cares enough to argue with me!  I wouldn't worry about it, but I'd send the blogger a copy of the article after you publish it.

Also, I'm not sure expressing opinions about a conference paper online constitutes libel. 

[daniel_von_flanagan]

I think putting a critique about someone's unpublished work on a blog like this is extremely bad manners.

Whether you contact the blogger is up to you. I think though that it is worthwhile to just submit the paper.  Either his criticisms still apply to the new version or they don't.  In the latter case, this should be apparent to the referees/editor.  In the former case, your paper either makes its case despite these criticisms, in which case it will get published, or it doesn't, in which case it ought not be published anyway.

Somewere either in the paper or in the cover letter (or both), it should be clear that this paper is not exactly the same one that you presented at the conference.  For example, a footnote saying "This paper is an updated and corrected version of results we presented at XXX" would tell anyone reading it that the criticisms of the earlier paper might no longer apply. - DvF

[squiddude]

I just wanted to say a quick thanks to the folks who responded.  I probably will not insist that who takes the comments down - I will admit to some failings on my part which hu pointed out - but I am heartened by the idea of sending hu a copy should it be printed.  Actually makes me giggle a little.

Great advice, folks, and I feel much better about the situation.

[larryc]

Agreeing with DvF on the manners part. I blog about my discipline and I would never do something like this. Probably the blogger never imagined you reading the post. Does the blog allow comments? You could leave a comment, something light and cheerful but with a "caught you!" tone as well.

[daniel_von_flanagan]

Agreeing with DvF on the manners part. I blog about my discipline and I would never do something like this. Probably the blogger never imagined you reading the post.

Some years back I had an unfortunate interview where I was misquoted by a major Fox newspaper; this, and my resulting correction (which they did not publish) both exist on blogs here and there.  A couple of years ago someone published an article on why (in his opinion) my analysis was wrong (though not supporting the Fox misquote).  I only learned this by accident; the author never contacted me, and the journal did not think to include me as a referee, or get my reaction in any way. Since countering my analysis was the entire subject of the article, not just a passing remark in a broader article, I found the lack of contact appalling.  (I would have recommended acceptance for the paper, BTW, though been obliged to point out that many other bigger shots in my specialty have gone on record since with analysis similar to mine.)  Possibly he thought I would be upset at seeing his article, but how could he imagine that I wouldn't eventually see it?

(PS - I just learned in this post that the CHE spell checker does not include the word "blog".  If any moderators are reading this: you probably want to correct that.)  - DvF

[afacultymember]

This is a murky, yet troubling area.

Blog comments should not affect one's acceptance for publication (blind peer review should prevent this). As for the fallout after publication or even during the editorial revision process, well, that should be the distinction between blogs and peer-review journals.

I think many of us have produced work that was valued in one venue (often among our peers) and subjected to ridicule in another (often among the laity).

This problem is only going to get worse as time goes on. I suggest not worrying about it. Let you reputation among those who matter bolster you and forget some of the less reasonable commentators ...

My $.02.

[dr_stones]

Odds are that no reviewer or editor is going to go to this length, as most of them barely read the paper itself.

[reader]

I secretly obsess over my reputation and read any and everything I can find that refers to me or my work.

I observe that no one else--not one other person--comes even close to paying this kind of attention. 

And if you're famous enough to be misquoted and misunderstood, I say good for you.