Can peer review systems be run less expensively? Sure, if you eliminate major levels and elements of peer review. Continue reading
More value can be delivered online, and members seem to be seeking it. Is it time to move to an online-only benefits model for societies? Continue reading
In this first part of a three-part series, the intrusion of governments into scientific publishing is contemplated — its causes, current state, and possible effects. Continue reading
Value-based pricing of unique journal products may make sense from a revenue perspective, but not from a sustainability perspective. What are the options? Continue reading
The ALPSP study of the possible effects of a six-month embargo for journal content shows that humanities and social science journals are more at-risk, but the entire industry could find the precipice if such mandates were to take shape. Continue reading
A new report for the Center of Economic Development suffers from a strong bias in its authorship. But beyond that, its implicit complaints, if addressed completely, would lead to a trainwreck in the world of scholarly communication. Is nobody thinking these things through? Continue reading
The US government’s requests for information are of great importance for the future of academia and scholarly publishing. If you’re a traditionalist who sees open access as the downfall of civilization, an advocate who thinks information must be free, or someone who falls somewhere in between, this is your chance to create the future you’re seeking. Continue reading
Can social reputation metrics provide a meaningful incentive for researcher participation in peer-review and online commentary? Continue reading
Do the benefits of peer review outweigh the work involved? How does post-publication review stack up in comparison? Continue reading
An article’s authors and a journal’s editor are surprised when a puff-piece backfires. Thanks for the pretentious seriousness, blogosphere. Continue reading