ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
Arnold,
As a journal editor who reads a lot of blogs, and even wastes some time posting a few from time to time, I would not entirely disagree. However, I think the issue is not necessarily that what appears in journals and periodicals, or at least some of them (certainly not the one I edit! :-)) is awful or uninteresting. It is that especially in journals it tends to be rather old by the time it actually appears, especially in the hard print versions. Most papers that appear in journals have been out on websites in some version or other for some time, and thus may well have already been discussed in some form or other in the blogosphere already, if they are of sufficient interest along such lines.
Barkley,
That suggests a different model for print journals. You could have a journal that is nothing but a list of papers that have been formally refereed and approved, with the links to those papers.
As far as the print medium goes, it might be best to have a print-on-demand publication, where I select articles that I would like to have in hard copy, and then they some to me in a nice bound format.