Misinformation, Disinformation, and Scholarly Communication (Part 2)
How should we think about the problems of misinformation and disinformation in the context of scholarly publishing, research, and libraries?
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?
A recently announced partnership with Emerald Publishing will bring the EveryLibrary Institute’s expertise to the academic library community as the U.S. government attacks extend to institutions of higher education.
The renaming of “Mount Denali” and “Gulf of Mexico” to the politically loaded “Mount McKinley” and “Gulf of America” reveal the naked truth of what cataloging has always been: a battlefield where meaning is contested and conquered.
What can be done to resolve concerns about image integrity in scientific publications?
Image integrity has been a growing issue in scholarly publishing. Todd Carpenter suggests we addreess the problem of image integrity at scale.
Like Tolkien’s “Ents” marched against deforestation, scholars, scientists, and their supporters must awaken to the widespread risks of these authoritarian trends and unite their efforts in resistance.
The many trust issues in scholarly publishing might benefit from applying a zero-trust framework to the publication process.
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.
What is the Forensic Scientometrics Declaration, and how did it come about? An interview with Dr. Leslie McIntosh.
Here we examine the second phase of China’s Journal Excellence Action Plan, its implications, its funding framework, and what it means for Chinese scientific journals, researchers, and the broader international academic publishing community.
A new survey looks at the philosophies and practices around librarian credentialing in the United States.
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.
Robert Harington attempts to reveal inherent conflicts in our drive to be as open as possible, authors’ need to understand their rights, and a library’s mandate to provide their patrons with the enhanced discovery that comes with AI’s large language models (LLMs).
Leading into Peer Review Week 2024, we ask the Chefs: What is, or would be, the most valuable innovation in peer review for your community?