Rick Anderson is University Librarian at Brigham Young University. He has worked previously as a bibliographer for YBP, Inc., as Head Acquisitions Librarian for the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, as Director of Resource Acquisition at the University of Nevada, Reno, and as Associate Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication at the University of Utah. He has written three books on librarianship and scholarly communication and is a regular contributor to the Scholarly Kitchen. He has served as president of the North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG), and is a recipient of the HARRASSOWITZ Leadership in Library Acquisitions Award. In 2015 he was elected President of the Society for Scholarly Publishing. He serves on the advisory boards of numerous publishers and organizations including biorXiv, Taylor & Francis, JSTOR, and Oxford University Press.
The NIH has answered the lingering questions about the future of the Nelson Memo. Not only is it still in effect, it’s being accelerated by six months. We asked the Chefs for their thoughts.
How should we think about the problems of misinformation and disinformation in the context of scholarly publishing, research, and libraries?
How do the problems of misinformation and disinformation intersect with the concerns of scholarly communication?
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.
We asked the Chefs to weigh in on the policy chaos emerging from Washington over the last ten days.
What is the Forensic Scientometrics Declaration, and how did it come about? An interview with Dr. Leslie McIntosh.
India’s recently announced One Nation, One Subscription plan is in some ways an audacious step into the future and, in other ways, an embrace of the past. What are its implications?
The beginning of the holiday season means it’s time for our annual list of our favorite books read (and other cultural creations experienced) during the year. Part 2 today.
DORA’s reaction to Clarivate’s decision to no longer fully index eLife (and, therefore, not to give it a Journal Impact Factor) seems inconsistent with both its and eLife’s public positions, and based on the mistaken belief that “disruption” is an absolute good in itself.
In 2023 we twice assessed the social media landscape and with the explosion of Bluesky over the last weeks it seemed a good time to reassess. How do Chefs use social media differently now, and what are they seeing as platforms of choice or opportunity?
Antitrust litigation has been filed against six major scholarly publishers. We reached out to the community for their thoughts.
Revisiting Rick Anderson’s 2022 post which asks, are libraries “neutral”? That question is way too simplistic to serve as anything other than a political football.
Three Oxford administrators want to lower the cost of mandatory open access by shifting the responsibility for enforcement to funding agencies. But that doesn’t lower costs at all; it only shifts them. To truly lower costs, stop trying to make open access mandatory.
How will the American Sunlight Project make it more costly for bad actors to spread disinformation — and what does this mean for scholarly publishing?
Open Café, a new listserv dedicated to the free and open discussion of open scholarship has been met with enthusiasm by the scholarly communication community.