Melonie Fullick offers a nice run-down of the recent discussion of the issue of live tweeting at academic conferences:
One of the more interesting points discussed, in my opinion, is the use of the notion of peer review to argue against live tweeting. The idea is that tweeting doesn’t count as ‘real’ academic work, since it is not peer reviewed.
For any academic tweeter, however, this idea — while understandable — is liable to sound either counter-intuitive or just plain false. For those of us active on twitter, the whole activity is a kind of extended peer review (along with a kind of publishing/dissemination/impact tool).
The question of live tweeting at conferences turns quickly to the question of who counts as a ‘real’ peer?