The 2025 Scholarly Kitchen Readership Survey is Now Open
The 2025 Scholarly Kitchen readership survey is now open. We would greatly appreciate your ideas and feedback to help us remain a high-quality resource of industry news and discussion
The 2025 Scholarly Kitchen readership survey is now open. We would greatly appreciate your ideas and feedback to help us remain a high-quality resource of industry news and discussion
The first AI training case has been decided in the US in favor of the copyright holder.
In response to US government efforts to censor research and researchers, a small group of scholarly communications professionals have launched a Declaration to defend research. Learn more in today’s post by Alice Meadows, one of the members of this group.
The US government is looking to drastically reduce the amount paid in “indirect costs” in federal grants. Just what are “indirect costs”?
“Rights reservation language, whether in plain English, included in terms, or coded into, e.g., metadata, is “machine readable.” It is a choice by an AI developer to not read “human readable” rights reservation language.”
Reflections on the current moment from SSP’s Board of Directors.
Academic libraries’ first and most fundamental obligation is to support the work of their host institutions. This doesn’t preclude global engagement, but may put constraints upon it.
Five scholarly publishing associations partner to launch a new award recognizing innovation and impact in scholarly communications.
Now is a time when we must continue to stand against censorship and to support the scholarly community in both our words and our actions, according to our ethics and beliefs.
What are the implications of last Friday’s NIH ICR budget cut? @lisalibrarian offers an early analysis.
Because body parts have always been with us, they can tell us a lot about the development of languages.
Traditional metrics do not allow us to fully express how OA publishing benefits society; here’s a vision for the future of storytelling with usage data in scholarly communications.
The many trust issues in scholarly publishing might benefit from applying a zero-trust framework to the publication process.
Bringing back a post from 2018, as funders increasingly demand measurements of “real world” impact from researchers. Does this steer us toward the same traps we’re already in from the ways we already do research assessment and is this short-term thinking problematic for the future of science?
My glass of optimism is usually full. But my glass is leaking now, or maybe it’s broken? The realities of the new political landscape have cast its shadow on the future of academia.