As I write this, the Society of Automotive Historians’ discussion board (go here) has not had a new posting or comment since August 12. This is despite the SAH promoting the fairly new service in its e-newsletter.
In a previous post on this topic, I expressed hope that activity would pick up after the end of summer (go here). Why hasn’t it? For example, are the SAH’s difficulties in launching the discussion board an indicator that the auto history field is dying off?
I doubt it. Commercial media outlets such as Hemmings and Curbside Classic don’t appear to have had any recent trouble in cultivating lively comment threads. Perhaps SAH’s biggest problem is that its discussion board has not been adequately pump primed.
In other words, SAH may not have posted enough content to draw readership — and participation. The discussion board could also benefit from more ongoing promotion.
Does SAH have a print-oriented org culture?
The care and feeding of the discussion board may not be happening for a variety of reasons, but it may be worth pondering whether a generational dynamic is at play. SAH may be more grounded in the print era, where fairly one-way communication was dominant. SAH publishes a bimonthly newsletter and a semi-annual journal called the Automotive History Review (go here for more information).
Two-way communication venues such as a discussion board require a different mindset. The focus is on cultivating rich conversations, such as by moderators asking intriguing questions and then moving the discussion along with follow-up comments.
Of course, that takes a certain amount of coordination — and time. Perhaps the SAH simply doesn’t have that capacity right now. If so, that’s too bad. As we have previously discussed, an auto history discussion board that brings together car buffs and scholars could make an outsized contribution to the field.
Be the first to comment