Guest Post — The Human Layer: Why AI Makes Academic Libraries More Essential, Not Less
The opportunity presented by AI is not to remove the human layer of scholarship. It is to recognize why that layer has always mattered.
The opportunity presented by AI is not to remove the human layer of scholarship. It is to recognize why that layer has always mattered.
Today’s guest post argues that digital preservation is not just a technical problem, but a function that often ignores issues of social justice, quietly codifying existing imbalances in scholarly communication.
Publishing infrastructure shapes careers. It shapes what questions get asked, what research gets validated, and whose voices enter the global scholarly conversation. As the scholarly publishing market continues to consolidate, how does that impact different communities in different ways?
Four Bangladeshi academics touch upon different aspects of academic publishing by linking them with the SDGs: accessing research; equity in co-authorship; editorial leadership; and SDG framing.
The future of scholarly communication will not be determined by how powerful AI becomes, but by whether the research community remains clear about the purpose those capabilities are meant to serve and whether it can govern them together.
While it’s true that AI may be viewed as “legitimate,” it’s far from universally loved. Understanding that distinction tells us something important about how the technology may ultimately be adopted — and governed — within academia.
A conversation on AI retrieval, the provenance problem, and the shared infrastructure scholarly publishing needs.
New guidance from the US government on research funding makes publishing and journal subscription costs unallowable.
AI scholarly search tools often miss important literature due to incomplete metadata. Better full-text-derived metadata could significantly improve discovery.
For scholarly publishers, the user has changed faster than the systems designed to serve them, and the gap between the two is where most of the difficult work is happening.
Today, we feature a friendly debate on the question: which parts of the research lifecycle should be more automated, and which require more of a human touch — and why?
Publishers that lack a deliberate library relations strategy are making consequential decisions without important and useful community perspectives.
Today’s post recaps a lively roundtable conversation with library and information science experts who have been guest bloggers for TSK and active SSP participants.
Today’s guest bloggers ask: Can Diamond OA serve as a genuine lifeline for the scholarly monograph?
Today’s guest blogger continues the conversation about Library Relations roles and what it means to sit at the intersection of libraries and publishing.