New Scholarly Kitchen Podcast — Adventures with the FOIA
A new episode of the Scholarly Kitchen podcast is ready. This time, we talk with head chef Kent Anderson about his experience filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
A new episode of the Scholarly Kitchen podcast is ready. This time, we talk with head chef Kent Anderson about his experience filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Revisiting Kent Anderson’s post based on his FOIA request documents show that PubMed Central spends most of its money tagging author manuscripts, and that its stricter rules for NIH authors may double its costs.
As requested, here is a summary of all the things found so far through the FOIA requests regarding PubMed Central — from eLife to BMC to JMLA to conflicts of interest to coverups. It’s quite a fetch.
[…] NAC, which only recently became available, there was no discussion of materials ascertained through a Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request, information which showed that the PMC NAC itself was kept in the dark about activities at PMC, and […]
[…] eLife being published through PMC. However, based on emails and documents obtained via an ongoing Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request, we now know that the initial request came from eLife, specifically and explicitly wishing to use PMC as […]
[…] yesterday, sharing information gleaned from reams of printed emails, memos, and presentations generated by a Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request I filed in November 2012. Today, I’m going to explain finding something in those 500+ pages that I […]
New documents obtained via an ongoing FOIA request show that PubMed Central spends most of its money tagging author manuscripts, and that its stricter rules for NIH authors may double its costs.
[…] on PMC. After what struck me as unsatisfactory answers and aggressive stone-walling, I filed a Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request about a week later. I’ve been receiving documents based on this and other FOIA requests ever since and […]
[…] The final 200+ pages of items responsive to an expanded “F1000 Research” portion of my Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request show not only that PMC leadership once again violated its stated policies by inviting F1000 Research into PMC, […]
[…] animal welfare was removed from the US Department of Agriculture site, requiring taxpayers to file Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) requests to learn what is going on in more than 1,200 labs and more than 6,000 other animal facilities, […]
[…] Library of Medicine (NLM) justify this design? According to documents recently obtained through an ongoing Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request, not very well or clearly — and certainly not openly. This story begins in February 2011, when Janet […]
[…] the world on the backs of UK taxpayers. And documents recently acquired via my ongoing Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) requests show that taxpayer subsidy has been a sensitive issue within the NIH, and that it has not been […]
[…] indexed in PubMed? Let’s look at what I recently obtained via the ongoing and expanded Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request filed with the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The materials reveal how PMC changed its role relative to […]
[…] In emails between PeerJ and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) retrieved via my ongoing Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request, PeerJ confidently notes its similarity to other journals that have no editorial leader at their helms — PLoS […]
[…] and NLM have been very aware of it, based on internal emails obtained from a Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) request. Since the first post last October, there were indications within emails from NIH and NLM employees to librarians […]