The Historical Enterprise and the Future of Twitter

Kevin Levin has an interesting essay on his website, Civil War Memory, in which he asks the question, “Is Twitter Good for History?” Levin recalls being on the website for ten years, developing a strong following, and working hard to use his historical knowledge to correct misinformation about the Civil War era. However, after quitting the site for good two months ago, he questions whether his time was well spent on the website or whether it’s good for the entire discipline of history.

I am still on Twitter for now, but find myself asking similar questions lately.

I was required to join the website as part of a graduate level digital humanities course in 2013. The stereotypes I had in my head about the website made me question why we had to join the website, but I quickly fell in love with the platform. I was blown away by how many historians were using the website to share articles, discuss the state of the field, and share their own scholarship. I spent a lot of time following these conversations and trying to find historians to connect with. The mix of good conversation, scholarship, and a bit of commentary on current events (but not an overwhelming amount) appealed to me.

Twitter eventually became an extension of my professional career, a sort of digital business card to demonstrate my passion for public history and the Civil War era. I have been very, very fortunate to have received invitations to write essays, contribute book chapters, and give presentations because someone found me on Twitter. The website has undoubtedly been good for me.

It is safe to say, however, that I gave up the notion of positively influencing public discussions about history via Twitter a long time ago. Many historians on the website have argued that there is a sort of moral obligation to advance a more thoughtful, nuanced view of history to public audiences, but I think the field’s collective influence is extremely limited in the first place. The fluidity of the Twitter feed means that information is constantly passing through the screen and dying a quick death. A well-written Twitter thread might get a few thousand views and retweets, and even that occurrence is rare. Levin also points out that “Tweets enjoy a short half-life . . . but beyond that they quickly fly off into the dark never to be seen again.” I also mentioned in a different essay on this website two years ago that Twitter lacks basic tools to ensure that past tweets are easily accessible for future audiences.

Twitter is ultimately beneficial to me not because I’ve been able to shape the hearts and minds of lay audiences, but because it’s allowed me to connect with other historians.

Is Twitter good for history? I think it’s been good for building connections and conversations within the field. Put differently, Twitter allows for historians around the world to communicate with each other beyond the annual conference circuit provided by organizations like the AHA, OAH, and NCPH. However, I question whether it has provided much influence beyond our own scholarly communities. Continued cuts to humanities funding, assaults on tenure, few academic or public history jobs, the popularity of questionable Bill O’Reilly/Bret Baier pop histories, and obnoxious laws prohibiting any K-12 history instruction that makes students feel any sort of “discomfort” about the past all point towards the #Twitterstorians community having little influence beyond its own walls. I don’t see many politicians advocating for the history field lately, or at least a form of history education that professionals could get behind.

Don’t get me started on the book bans!

What’s disappointing about the future of Twitter is that it’s become Elon Musk’s play toy for him to do whatever he wants and promote whatever cause he is concerned about. To be frank, the website has become dull and boring. As Levin’s departure shows, a lot of talented people have gladly left the platform. Divisive content from the loudest voices is pushed to the top while the voices of those who pay $8 a month to get a blue checkmark are given privileged placement by the site’s algorithms. So much for “free” speech, right?

I don’t know what the future holds for the historical enterprise when it comes to social media. Some folks have taken their talents to TikTok and Instagram through fascinating video productions. My friend Marvin-Alonzo Greer (@magthehistorian) has mastered these platforms and is doing great work that genuinely seems to be reaching an audience beyond the academy. I thought Post or Mastodon would be suitable replacements for Twitter, but I’ve been greatly disappointed by both. I personally put a lot of hope into Post, but the site has been geared more towards sharing news. Many users seem to only post about Donald Trump or Musk, which I find boring and unproductive. Mastodon’s platform is too siloed and I couldn’t log into the site from my phone, so I gave up on it quickly. I’ll keep tweeting for now, but I have no idea what will happen with the site moving forward.

I guess I will keep trucking along with this little website and see where that takes me 🙂

Cheers