The Year in Review: 2024 in The Scholarly Kitchen
Before we plunge into 2025, a look back at 2024, a year of uncertainty in The Scholarly Kitchen.
Growth Without Burnout: Managing Polarities Consciously for Sustainable Success in Publishing
A relentless push for growth can lead to burnout among authors, editors, and reviewers, while also placing undue pressure on organizations to maintain high levels of output. How can we better provide the infrastructure and support systems needed to sustain that growth over the long term.
Chatting at the Kitchen Table about India’s ONOS Deal
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?
Access to Science & Scholarship: An Interview with Amy Brand of MIT Press
On September 20, 2024, MIT Press hosted a workshop, Access to Science & Scholarship: An Evidence Base to Support the Future of Open Research Policy. I interviewed Amy Brand to discuss the goals and outcomes of the workshop.
Disruption As an End in Itself: eLife’s Suspension and DORA’s Response
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.
Guest Post: Supply Chain of Writing Fools
While Aretha Franklin’s “Chain of Fools” referred to betrayal of trust in love, when it comes to AI use of our work, writers feel betrayed by those who should be protecting our intellectual and creative property.
Wiley Leans into AI. The Community Should Lean with Them.
An interview with Wiley SVP Josh Jarrett about their work improving publishing processes with AI and licensing content for AI applications.
Scholarly Publishing: The Elephant (And Other Wildlife) In The Room
Journal-based scholarly communication needs a structural change
Guest Post: This Open Access Week Theme Has a Distinguished History
Some thoughts on this year’s Open Access Week theme, “community over commercialization.”
Tracking the Licensing of Scholarly Content to LLMs
We have developed a tool to track publisher deals to license scholarly content for use as training data by LLMs
Embracing Innovation: Insights from Peer Review Leaders on Managing Technological Change
The real challenge in implementing new peer review technologies lies in managing the human and organizational changes required to make these innovations stick. Three experts share their insights into how they are leading their teams through these transformative processes.
Ensuring attribution is critical when licensing content to AI developers
Publishers should support scholarly authors by requiring license deals with AI developers include attribution in their outputs.
Revisiting — What Does “Federally Funded” Actually Mean?
With a new public access memo and federal agency policies due, Angela Cochran revisits her 2013 post exploring what Federally Funded means.
Guest Post — New Directions Seminar: Reverse Roundtables Kept the Post-Lunch Conversations Going!
What are the new directions in scholarly publishing? Check out the unique “reverse roundtable” discussions at SSP’s New Directions seminar!
Oxford Administrators Want OA Policy Removed from REF 2029. I Have an Even Better Idea.
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.