Robert Harington digs into the world of preprints. He uses the field of mathematics to explore how an inclusive view of preprints and published articles leads to a research ecosystem that is greater than the sum of the parts.
We asked the Chefs for their thoughts on two important court decisions on the legality of using copyrighted materials for AI training.
A summary of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) debate session, where Haseeb Irfanullah argued in favor of a motion declaring that journal editors do not need to worry about preventing the spread of misinformation, while Are Brean argued against it.
Heather Staines Presidential Address from the SSP 2025 Annual Meeting.
Some thoughts midway through the SSP 2025 Annual Meeting.
Changes in Library of Congress leadership could have profound impacts on copyright and intellectual freedom.
While our understanding of climate change is shaped by academia, the climate crisis also shapes academia’s research and teaching in numerous ways. In this article, I explore the current climate change-academia relationship and touch upon some envisaged changes.
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.
Alice Meadows and guest chef Suze Kundu look at how, by acting collectively across all stakeholder groups, we could turn the Trump administration’s threats against research into opportunities
We are expecting the US Government’s AI Action Plan to be issued over the summer. In the meantime, we may glean some of the administration’s views by looking at recently issued information from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Science is built on a foundation of rigor and credibility. Preprints are adding to the crumbling of that foundation, which is already under attack by anti-science political agendas.
It is time for OA proponents to engage in public debate with academic associations, universities and national funding agencies, because the widespread use of academic content in AI models poses significant risks for the research ecosystem.
I think human-dependent peer review has lost its human element, thus its relevance, so what we can do to install a new system by abandoning the present one?
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?