The publishing industry seems to be focused on improving a system that already works well, the system of topical information flows. Perhaps it should be looking at the system of method information flows.
A surprising collection found at the Schroedinger Archive includes a number of works of short fiction that take scholarly communications as their subject. In it, we find a tale with many surprising reversals — “The Library With No Books In It.”
In my last posting, I posed four questions brought to my mind by the Aaron Swartz case. Here, I propose what I think are reasonable answers to those questions. The result is kind of a long post, but hey, it’s the weekend. Tell your spouse that the yard work will have to wait; you’re busy helping to solve the fundamental structural problems of the scholarly information marketplace.
Claims of speed can be used to carve out a competitive edge, especially for journals serving authors. PLoS ONE entered the market claiming fast publication times, but data show that PLoS ONE is slowing down, with times more than doubling over the past few years. Is PLoS ONE losing its speed advantage?
Let’s suppose, for the sake of argument, that the allegations against Swartz are proved and that he’s convicted. What would his case mean? It seems to me that it raises a number of questions that have received insufficient attention up until now.
Does the release of a journal ranking metric signal a change in vision for post-publication peer review?
Announcing a Mellon Foundation-funded study of patron-driven acquisition (PDA) and its implications for academic book publishers.
Welcome to a new feature of the Scholarly Kitchen we’re calling “Ask the Chefs.” The premise is that each month, the Chefs (contributors) to the Scholarly Kitchen will answer a provocative question in a pithy paragraph or two. Each Chef answers the question without benefit of seeing the others’ responses. This month’s question: “What Do You Think Is the Most Important Trend in Publishing Today?”