Revisiting a 2018 primer on the business side of publishing. The defining property of traditional publishing is editorial selection. That is what publishing is about.
In Part 2 of this pair of posts we turn the tables and Gerald Beasley interviews Timon Oefelein of Springer Nature about how publishers can support the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
In Part 1 of this pair of posts, Timon Oefelein interviews Gerald R. Beasley, the Carl A. Kroch University Librarian at Cornell University, about how librarians can support the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Open peer review has been growing steadily but its implementations take many different forms. Alison Mudditt and Véronique Kiermer take a deep dive into the question of whether reviewers should be openly identified.
Revisiting Tim Vines’ 2017 post — Open data continues to gain ground, but is there a revenue stream that would help journals recover the costs of gathering, reviewing and publishing data?
Octopus is a new sharing platform that hopes to disrupt research culture for the better. An interview with founder Dr. Alexandra Freeman.
Looking back at Richard Poynder’s in-depth analysis of the state of open access. What’s changed since then?
Jon Treadway and Sarah Greaves look at the consolidation of the scholarly communications market and where it is leading.
Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part two appearing here.
Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part one appearing here:
Shaun Khoo discusses the legal quandaries created by the Plan S Rights Retention Strategy (RRS).
For smaller and independent publishers, the Transformative Journal route to Plan S compliance seems like a viable option. At least until you see the reporting requirements.
On July 4, 1971 Michael Hart posted the first ebook file on the ARPANET and transformed content distribution.
Calls for a monoculture of scholarly communication keep multiplying. But wouldn’t a continued diversity of models be healthier?
Every five years Research4Life commissions in-depth reviews of its work to understand how the work of the partnership is experienced from the users’ as well as the partners’ perspectives. Domiziana Francescon discusses the latest findings.