The Global Transition Has Already Happened – It’s Just Not the One You Expected (Part 1 of 2)
The global scholarly publishing ecosystem has already transitioned — not to open access, but to a diverse hybrid system. So much the better.
Insights from the SSP Organizational Compensation and Benefits Study
Building on SSP’s spring results of the individual compensation and benefits study, Melanie Dolechek shares insights from the organizational survey — a slide of the survey data that provides useful benchmarks on policies and practices across publishing organizations.
Guest Post – The First Year of an Open Access Initiative in Review
Today’s guest blogger explains how Drexel University sees transformative agreements as one of the best ways to support researchers and the public dissemination of knowledge, while also benefiting the university through cost-saving measures.
Ask the Chefs: Who Owns Our Knowledge?
In honor of International OA Week, The Scholarly Kitchen Chefs ponder the theme: Who owns our knowledge?
Five Tips for Hosting a Sustainable Event
Event planners are faced with the delicate balance between constructing spaces for deeper connection with the impact we’re having on our planet. Here’s what I’ve learned about planning events that prioritize sustainability.
Guest Post — The Economics of AI in Academic Research
In the fast-moving world of AI research tools, there are many community-focused concerns that vendors should have strong opinions on and plans for, from privacy and security to sustainability and copyright. But the most misunderstood issue, in my view, is the one at the heart of it all — how AI will reshape the economics of academic research.
Subscribe-to-Open Is Doomed. Here’s Why.
A scholarly communication ecosystem that relies on voluntary support rather than charging for access to content becomes radically less capable of keeping money in the system.
Guest Post — Who Controls Knowledge in the Age of AI? Part 2, Recommendations for Stakeholders
The MIT Press surveyed book authors on attitudes towards LLM training practices. In Part 2 of this 2 part post, we discuss recommendations for stakeholders to avoid unintended harms and preserve core scientific and academic values.
Guest Post — Who Controls Knowledge in the Age of AI? Part 1
The MIT Press surveyed book authors on attitudes towards LLM training practices. In Part 1 of this 2 part post, we discuss the results: authors are not opposed to generative AI per se, but they are strongly opposed to unregulated, extractive practices and worry about the long-term impacts of unbridled generative AI development on the scholarly and scientific enterprise.
Guest Post — From Overhead to Essential: The FAIR Model Recognizes Research Information Services as Essential to the Research Enterprise
FAIR represents the best opportunity of the models under consideration to ensure that research information services receive appropriate recognition and sustainable funding
Guest Post — Society Publishers at a Crossroads: New Evidence of an Accelerating Crisis
A recent survey of 66 learned societies (primarily in the UK) revealed a revenue crisis which threatens the very existence of community-driven publishing, and by extension learned societies themselves.
Confused and Ambivalent: Scholarly Authors and Creative Commons Licenses
An AAAS survey reveals authors’ concerns and confusion regarding open licensing of their work.
Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table — Matthew Kissner
Robert Harington talks to Matt Kissner, CEO of Wiley, in this series of perspectives from some of Publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and for-profit sectors of our industry.
Guest Post: Will JAG’s New Models Give Libraries and Publishers a Better Seat at the Federal Funding Table?
As US federal policy on indirect costs remains uncertain, the Joint Associations Group seeks input on two proposed models. Learn about the models and implications for library funding and publishers.
Indirect Costs (Facilities and Administration Cost) Explainer
The US government is looking to drastically reduce the amount paid in “indirect costs” in federal grants. Just what are “indirect costs”?