Modern “word processing” programs can do everything from check spelling and grammar to finishing your sentences for you. This might be convenient for the creator, but some “helpful” upgrades can wreak havoc for manuscript editors. In today’s Guest Post, Bruce Rosenblum and Sylvia Izzo Hunter explore the pitfalls of making the comments features less editor friendly.
Annotation is increasingly being recognized as a valuable tool in scholarly communications, enabling increased engagement and collaboration and better metrics, and helping improve the quality of scholarly outputs. In this guest post, Heather Staines (Director of Business Development – Hypothes.is) and Alexander Naydenov (Head of Marketing and Co-Founder – Paperhive) tell us why!
Trolls dominate for many reasons — economics, technology, our predilection for sordid entertainment. But they’ve chilled online discourse and damaged civil exchanges, even making some publishers reluctant to take full advantage of the potential of the Internet. Are we ready for v2.0 of commenting?
Let’s talk about the comment moderation policy at The Scholarly Kitchen.
Recent data from the Guardian suggests that commenting remains a fringe activity, often dominated by a few voices. What might this mean for initiatives based on altmetrics and post-publication review?
Web 2.0 may be shattering the established control of elite media. In their place are loud and aggressive voices.