schlesinger1

In a desperate job market where supply far outpaces demand, calling applicants neo-imperialist for applying widely seems a bit harsh. Throw what you can against the wall and hope something sticks. That's a common strategy on the job market, regardless of field.

This seems on the money. I'm now in a TT R1 position, and I have zero online presence. Your online profile could not matter less in comparison to the quality of your research and, as AC suggests above, the mismanagement of social media has serious downsides.

Also depends on the school that's hiring. The problem is magnified at R1s--you won't be competitive after maybe three or four years (maximum) of postdocs/VAPs. Unofficial rules are less defined at lower-ranked schools.

Unfortunately, yes, bad idea

I know it's hard, but resist the temptation!

Very different fields indeed. Perhaps you should think in terms of "America in the world."

I wouldn't. That strikes me as bad form.

Agreed. Don't share the information.

It's quite thoughtful and considerate of candidates to withdraw applications from programs that they are confident they won't attend, but be careful not to be too hasty. Remember that your primary responsibility is to yourself, and you owe yourself the opportunity to explore all possibilities.

agreed. digital methods allow scholars to ask new questions and look at evidence in different lights. richard white's book "railroaded" is a good example of this

Meg11: If you're interested in gender history, you might also consider adding Rutgers and UCSB, which typically have strong programs in the field

I second digital history

writing a master's thesis may also help you decide if you want to pursue the phd

very, very happy about this