The answer I would have thought is obviously 'no,' but philosopher Rebecca Kukla (Georgetown) takes a different view. She writes:
I will focus on the role of social media for graduate students and untenured faculty in philosophy. I think there’s no doubt that staying off of social media altogether can actively harm your career, while using it wisely can actively help you, and can genuinely enrich your professional and intellectual life. A huge number of professional opportunities show up first and most prominently on Facebook, both as formal announcements and through informal discussions. A great deal of philosophical conversation that shapes the debates in our field happens on social media. Co-authorships and collaborations often take root online. People get to know one another’s personalities and research through these media. it clearly helps in getting interviews and invitations if people already know who you are, and like you and think highly of your ideas. I have certainly learned about the work of graduate students and young scholars through social media, and then offered them invitations and opportunities, used and assigned their work, and sought out their company at conferences as a result.
This may, indeed, have been her experience in some of her fields, and so to that extent, it's worth noting for those with similar interests. But in philosophy of law, or post-Kantian Continental philosophy, none of this is true: I've never seen "philosophical conversation" on Facebook or similar social media platforms having any affect on the actual debates, which arise from actual scholarly work presented in the traditional fora and formats. I'm not aware of anyone in these fields who got an invitation based on Facebook presence either. So I wonder: how widespread a phenomenon is the kind Prof. Kukla describes? I'm skeptical based on my corner of philosophy and social media.
