Is "Digital" Dead?

It occurred to me while I was working on the project "Oral History in the Digital Age", that I wonder what the inevitable post-digital age will be characterized by... I'm wondering if at some point we'll be able to stop putting the word "digital" in front of everything and just call it "the work we're doing now". This stems from a question I've had for several months now: what does "digital" really mean? Despite it's flagrant use as modifier for all sorts of things, I think it just means we use computers, which is such a given at this point in history that we hardly need to make a note of it. I'm starting to think it might be time to reign in that term, and make sure that our enthusiasm for the potential that computers bring to us (and the potential of web-based social connectivity) does not get confused with what our actual work is.

Digital Humanities Discussion

In November I'll be attending the American Studies conference in San Juan and will be on a panel talking about Digital Humanities in graduate education. Although our primary identity at Randforce is more in Digital Indexing than digital humanities, we've worked with people like Mark Tebeau at Cleveland State and folks at the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University--who run THATcamp and have developed Omeka--and generally have a lot to say about this diverse and emerging field. As part of the ramp-up to the conference I've been invited/encouraged to post and comment on this blog:

Digital Dimensions of Grad Ed in Am Studies

Check it out to join or view the discussion... The session is co-sponsored by the Graduate Education Committee and the Digital Humanities Caucus of the American Studies Association. Thanks to Rob Snyder for inviting me to join that panel!