PonyFans.com

It begins.

http://artsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2012/04/books-vs-basketball-or-smu-is.html

Someone needs to tell this misinformed clown that boosters from SMU are paying for the coaches not SMU.

He needs to get laid.

Mitch McConnell wrote:He needs to get laid.

YEAH

How many books published by the SMU Press were ever read by more than 10 people?

I'm sympathetic to the guy's argument, but I personally find El Presidente Jerry's shine to himself behind Blanton to be the most egregious "we could still have SMU Press" example.

I really think it's critical to SMU's academic profile that we manage to get the SMU Press running once more, and in a better fashion than before. The professor is absolutely right. Presses can really push universities forward and it's something which needs more support from those in power/wealthy alumni. So even though I know that boosters are paying for the basketball coaches, the professor's argument is still valid. I just think he comes off as a bit of a damned fool by being so hyperbolic. Going to hell in a handbasket? Maybe he should volunteer as the head person in charge in fundraising for the press, just as Orsini took it upon himself to find people willing to fund the new staff.

Comet wrote:I really think it's critical to SMU's academic profile that we manage to get the SMU Press running once more, and in a better fashion than before. The professor is absolutely right. Presses can really push universities forward and it's something which needs more support from those in power/wealthy alumni. So even though I know that boosters are paying for the basketball coaches, the professor's argument is still valid. I just think he comes off as a bit of a damned fool by being so hyperbolic. Going to hell in a handbasket? Maybe he should volunteer as the head person in charge in fundraising for the press, just as Orsini took it upon himself to find people willing to fund the new staff.

If truly dynamic, I might agree with you. If we have a mediocre setup, it is not worth doing.
Unfortunately, so many schools have so many "university" presses that an enormous number of books are published that are never bought or read by a significant number of people. Since authors now have the option of self publishing e-books at very little cost, I do not see the need for universities to subsidize what is largely a vanity publication.

Let's look at the Spring 2012 offerings from the TCU Press: http://www.prs.tcu.edu/spring12.html. Reading the descriptions, there doesn't appear to be a great work in that group.

There is no question that this man is right. If it comes down to athletics versus academics then bye bye football. SMU has no legit research reputation. The only way, or at least the best way, to obtain such a reputation is to publish the finest research.

The fact that private money funds the athletic department undermines the argument, but the fact is that if a university is not fully behind the publishing of quality academic work, then the university cannot be considered a serious academic institution.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?tog4yl

Maybe he should actually, you know, lobby someone to give money, like all private universities do.

Digetydog wrote:

Comet wrote:I really think it's critical to SMU's academic profile that we manage to get the SMU Press running once more, and in a better fashion than before. The professor is absolutely right. Presses can really push universities forward and it's something which needs more support from those in power/wealthy alumni. So even though I know that boosters are paying for the basketball coaches, the professor's argument is still valid. I just think he comes off as a bit of a damned fool by being so hyperbolic. Going to hell in a handbasket? Maybe he should volunteer as the head person in charge in fundraising for the press, just as Orsini took it upon himself to find people willing to fund the new staff.

If truly dynamic, I might agree with you. If we have a mediocre setup, it is not worth doing.
Unfortunately, so many schools have so many "university" presses that an enormous number of books are published that are never bought or read by a significant number of people. Since authors now have the option of self publishing e-books at very little cost, I do not see the need for universities to subsidize what is largely a vanity publication.

Let's look at the Spring 2012 offerings from the TCU Press: http://www.prs.tcu.edu/spring12.html. Reading the descriptions, there doesn't appear to be a great work in that group.

There are lots of mediocre academic presses, but the fact remains that a university press is a requirement for advancing the academic qualities of a university. Just because one university publishes the unremarkable work of its faculty does not mean that a university with finer minds should shirk the responsibility of publishing their thoughts.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?ctlk1g

This is not even worth discussing. The MILITANT faculty had the rule over this school for about 22 years and now since the football program has come back, the Big East is coming and now that we hired Brown, they're frightened by change.

Now, they are coming up with all of these bullsh arguments because they feel like their influence is being de-valued.

I got news for them -- go teach and publish your books and enjoy a football game or basketball game or two. The toothpaste it out of tube.

If you don't like it, go somewhere else. You're not irreplaceable. SMU was here before you guys showed up on campus and will be here when you move somewhere else.

Digetydog wrote:

Comet wrote:I really think it's critical to SMU's academic profile that we manage to get the SMU Press running once more, and in a better fashion than before. The professor is absolutely right. Presses can really push universities forward and it's something which needs more support from those in power/wealthy alumni. So even though I know that boosters are paying for the basketball coaches, the professor's argument is still valid. I just think he comes off as a bit of a damned fool by being so hyperbolic. Going to hell in a handbasket? Maybe he should volunteer as the head person in charge in fundraising for the press, just as Orsini took it upon himself to find people willing to fund the new staff.

If truly dynamic, I might agree with you. If we have a mediocre setup, it is not worth doing.
Unfortunately, so many schools have so many "university" presses that an enormous number of books are published that are never bought or read by a significant number of people. Since authors now have the option of self publishing e-books at very little cost, I do not see the need for universities to subsidize what is largely a vanity publication.

Let's look at the Spring 2012 offerings from the TCU Press: http://www.prs.tcu.edu/spring12.html. Reading the descriptions, there doesn't appear to be a great work in that group.

Honestly, unless you're in academia for the disciplines represented in that link, who are you to say those works aren't great? That's for people in academia to determine. And that's what presses are, an outlet by academicians, for academicians. A university press isn't supposed to be Scholastic, or Random House, or Pearson. They have a different goal, and they're not out to publish the most NYTimes Best Sellers.

The value of such a press is irrelevant. The point is that nobody published ANYTHING about it until we hired a famous basketball coach. That shows clear ulterior motive.

If SMU felt that discontinuing the SMU Press would negatively impact its academic ranking, then it would have been saved. $400,000 is nothing to SMU. That the SMU Press was discontinued over such a small sum demonstrates what an academic afterthought it truly was.