So, here is the great thing about digital history: it can be done anywhere. Due to technical problems (computer crashing) and having to be in a doctor’s office waiting room at this moment, I am sending this post from my iPhone. Having tools at your disposal makes many things possible if you have mastery. This was one of the many salient points debated in the readings for class this week. It speaks both to issues in defining who a digital historian is or should be as well as a potential “cultural divide” that can exist consuming history when access to technology is limited for various reasons.
Having reviewed this weeks course readings for Digital History class, I am also reminded first of what a former graduate professor noted to a class to remember: “Historians argue about big things.” I am further reminded that sometimes historians make things bigger than what they really are. In essence, the thoroughly detailed, engaging and thoughtful reflections on the state, nature and future of “digital history” or “digital humanities” were complete in breath and depth, but at times missed the forest for the trees. I don’t mean to be cynical in this critique, but I could not help but feeling that methods can easily trump content if one is not careful.
Speaking from the perspective of a museum professional, and as many commented in the reading, digital “mediums” are “tools” for delivering important content. The history museum tells stories and attempts to interpret the facts with the best research methods.
The content is the metaphorical onion, tied to broader questions of the human story. That onion has many layers and can be prepared in many ways. The forward thinking historian or museum is formulating ways to franchise that onion into many available forms for new customers to eat (ie “learners”, audiences). Museums have the unique challenge of serving several audiences of “lifelong learners” at different levels. Digital mediums and methods allow the museum to engage learners in a myriad of ways, providing the greatest possible level of access.
This was difficult to write this way, so I am headed to store to buy a tablet!
Hungry for Knowledge 
I love your opening. You really drive the point home in that first paragraph. I also like how you noted that sometimes, historians make things bigger than they really are. The debate on digital history should be an easy one for technology to win. Bottom line, if historians want to keep up with the world around them, implementing all available technology is a must.
Emma
Thanks (and please forgive my informal approach). I totally agree with your last point. Still, there are core principals to follow in delivering good research (proper sources and references, for example). Build from a good core and every delivery method can work.
I love that you wrote this on your phone. The amount of time to publish something digitally is so much shorter than say…waiting for a book to be printed. I liked your onion analogy because they are a lot a different approach to sharing history. One artifact could be presented in multiple ways to multiple groups.
Thanks for the feedback. However, my eyes are still a bit blurry from writing on my phone.