Does Springer Nature’s first machine-generated book usher in a new era of authorship? Or readership? Are the robots writing?
Last week’s ACRL and STM conferences demonstrated that libraries and publishers have a renewed desire to understand the researcher experience and embrace the scholarly information practices that will define our future.
This year’s ER&L conference was abuzz with the threats and solutions for digital access in libraries.
The editorial board for the Journal of Informetrics declared checkmate when they resigned over Elsevier’s open access and open citations policies. Raising both practical and moral questions of journal ownership, the editors of Learning Publishing ask: What can this power move tell us about editorial ownership in the age of open science?
Exclusive indexing deals in scholarly discovery hurt researchers and undermine the drive toward comprehensive library search.
The beginning of the holiday season means it’s time for our annual list of our favorite books read during the year. Part 1 today, Part 2 tomorrow.
A fresh mapping of open-science tools for the researcher workflow reveals numerous gaps and opportunities for software solutions in the name of scientific progress.
We have seen a surge in scientifically minded search engines and browser extensions that aim to supercharge content discovery — have they cracked the code in mainstream search and retrieval of scholarly literature?
Accessible publishing is better for publishers, better for the bottom line, better for readers of all stripes. If we agree that egalitarian dissemination of academic content is the thing to do, including those with physical, learning, or cognitive challenges, then why does end-to-end accessible publishing continue to elude us?
An interview with MDPI’s CEO, Dr. Franck Vazquez, sheds light on the challenges and innovations during the last 20 years of open-access publishing.