C.E. Ball’s article argues (to traditionally-minded academics who consciously or unconsciously denigrate new media texts’ potential for “true” scholarship) that new media scholarship—that is, scholarship written as new media text, not necessarily about new media—deserves to be valued. She identifies a “gap” between what new media scholars say and what they do (409). In order to establish an ethos within the academic community, they publish (as Ball is doing, and she notes the irony) in print-privileging journals. She notes, too, that new media scholarship requires authors to “[cross] so many disciplinary and departmental boundaries, which makes it necessary for scholars to show colleagues across fields that one can work in new media (and not just write about it)” (407).