In recent years, observers have noticed that articles for which an APC has been paid are not always made freely available. How pervasive is this problem? A Scholarly Kitchen reader investigates.
Algorithms behave in ways even their creators can’t understand, yet they dominate how we share and see information. Do we need a “Three Laws for Algorithms”?
For years, we in libraries have been predicting the imminent demise of the manifestly-unsustainable Big Deal — and yet it has persisted. Now that may be changing.
Many of the finest scholarly publications can boast of exemplary editorial programs, but the advent of Gold Open Access, especially when mandated by funding agencies, may make this kind of editorial activity a thing of the past.
Science’s historical progress can’t be assumed. It has to be reclaimed, re-established. That’s more difficult in a fragmented information space geared for extremism.
It may seem as if it would be difficult to defend or justify a blatant piracy operation like Sci-Hub. But it can be done, if you’re willing to overlook certain facts and advance certain tenuous moral arguments.
The open access megajournal is a proven success, but its future may lie in the hands of commercial entities.
The information war requires changes — new research priorities, new personal and professional boundaries, higher editorial hurdles, and a hardened infrastructure.
Of the many proposals to lower the cost of college textbooks, the model called “inclusive access” may have the best chance, as it creates incentives for publishers and students alike.
Artificial intelligence is now a commodity appliance. What are the implications for Scholarly Publishing?
Does the closing of Axios Review portend the end of independent peer review?
This is a presentation on consolidation in scholarly communications. It provides a primer on how companies look at acquisitions, how they are financed, and why they are likely to continue. The presentation also touches on start-ups and venture capital.
Funders have shifted their focus, and are funding, investing in, or launching initiatives that compete with publishers and constrain researchers. What changed?
Are we thinking about predatory publishing the wrong way? Are researchers deliberately choosing these journals, and if so, what are the incentives driving this decision?
Several services attempt to gather up “all” of the content across publishers. This post provides an overview and taxonomy.