Today’s post asks: If research is increasingly accessed through AI-generated summaries rather than via primary sources, then what does it mean to “engage with research” at all?
Today’s guest post sounds an alarm about the use of AI in research and warns that no amount of computational efficiency can compensate for the loss of our capacity for human thought.
AI in science should not be viewed merely as a productivity tool layered onto existing workflows. It represents a structural shift in how knowledge moves through society, and therefore in how scientific authority is established and maintained.
There is more and more skepticism toward the role of publishers, a steady commoditization of publishing services, and growing fragmentation across the research ecosystem. If that is the case, the question is no longer what publishers do, but how that value is understood and extended.
Wendy Queen interviews Nadim Sadek. Nadim is a creative strategist and founder of Shimmr AI, who argues that AI can strengthen human creativity rather than replace it.
Today’s guest bloggers call for society publishers to recognize their unique role in shaping the systems researchers use to discover and evaluate knowledge.
As AI-driven search reduces friction in information-seeking, what happens to serendipity, frustration, and “night science”?
AI-driven zero-click search is widening the gap between visibility and usage, threatening publisher revenue, research integrity, and trust. How should we respond?
Todd Carpenter looks back on the past quarter century of a digital revolution in scholarly publishing.
As with previous shifts in content discovery, today’s winners will be those who understand the strengths and limits of AI search, and design systems that let researchers move fluidly between precision and synthesis.
The year in search at Google — is this the last one of these we’ll see?
As the search and user behavior landscapes undergo dramatic evolutions, marketers and others are left to wonder what SEO means for publishers now.
Today’s guest post spotlights a new scientific intelligence engine inspired by Thomas Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolution and the mission to give humanity the ability to see its own progress while it unfolds.
In today’s guest post, Wendy Queen (JHUP) continues her conversation with Trevor Owens (AIP) about how the tools and sensibilities of the humanities are helping to preserve the record of the physical sciences.
After five years of GetFTR, four librarians discuss how it is working in practice, its value to libraries and researchers, and what opportunities lie ahead.