¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 The most notable change in this draft is in response to Lara Putnam’s comment. She rightly noted that “the target of this particular essay is something far more helpfully specific than ‘the rise of digital history itself.’” We have reconfigured our second paragraph to eliminate the misleading passages, refine our intervention, and more explicitly connect our exploration of democratization with the evolution of digital history.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 We made a series of other brief changes to reflect the wish of Reader 2 and several others that we acknowledge the enduring challenges of open access publishing in the world of academic journals. Alex Lichtentstein’s final editors report offered us a helpful way to clarify those challenges. Similarly, one of Jordan Taylor’s comments, singled out in the same report, has been added to the conclusion of the manuscript to acknowledge that democratization is not the inevitable result of technological innovation, and, in fact, it requires resources and significant, intentional work.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 In an attempt to acknowledge the influence of libertarian discourse, alongside that of the New Left, we moved an acknowledgement of Stewart Brand from footnote 79 into the main text, much earlier in the article.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 We attempted to do more with Randall Miller’s note that this piece restricts itself almost entirely to scholarship from the United States. We believe that this is a necessary limitation of this single author, and hope that the explicit third footnote acknowledging that limitation is sufficient. We would welcome and indeed hope that other scholars will apply our analysis in other contexts.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 We believe that these changes have made a much stronger article and are deeply grateful for the editors and participants in this open review. We added a first footnote to immediately acknowledge the open review and its participants.