Cascading Peer-Review — The Future of Open Access?
BMJ Open is marketed as high-volume journal of rejects. Did BMJ miss on marketing or is this the future of open access publishing?
BMJ Open is marketed as high-volume journal of rejects. Did BMJ miss on marketing or is this the future of open access publishing?
Publishers still have to sell iPad content via single-issue apps. When will a subscription app finally be allowed?
Recent inflection points for the music industry may yet again prove instructive for publishers and others. But is it already too late for us to recover the craft of making products rather than providing content?
While losing distribution and production advantages might have hurt our businesses, losing our roles as anchoring and trust centers might cut deeper.
Traditional bookstores are missing a huge e-reader opportunity, proving that, sadly, they are not the customer-focused retailers they once were.
In a disruptive publishing environment, publishers cannot rely on a purely editorial strategy, as many of the issues now facing them are not editorial in nature.
It appears that the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) will be holding another “IN” meeting next month over my strenuous objections as a long-standing member of the society. My objections are not concerning SSP holding a Fall meeting – indeed, the autumn is my favorite time of the year to repair to a fine club, properly provisioned with brandy and cigars, to discuss the affairs of the society with other learned gentlemen. ather, my concerns are regarding the topic of the meeting. “IN,” I am told, stands for INnovation, INspiration, and INteraction. I am wont to think of a more unholy trinity of concepts and think “INfernal” is more apropos!
Consumers have demonstrated a willingness to pay for targeted, virtual goods and services. Why are publishers still trying to foist low-value generalized content off to them?
The over-preening Old Spice Guy likes libraries, and celebrates them in a short, funny video. Too bad a parody from BYU is even better.
Journals that fail to keep up with background Impact Factor inflation may actually be losing ground.
Book publishing is evolving in stages, and when we get to Stage Five, where books are sold on a subscription basis, the fortunes of scholarly publishers will improve dramatically.
By realizing content links news outlets and creating a barter system, Scott Karp’s Publish2 offers an interesting approach to the “content graph” networked information has created.
Using POD (print on demand) as a means to support open access is not a viable business model.
More flames on the site licensing frontier, and why these battles are a sign of a fundamentally flawed — and possibly soon-to-be irrelevant — arrangement.
The supply chain around trade publishing is “broken,” according to publishers. But are they what has broken?