Guest Post — Trust and Transparency in Open Access Book Publishing: Part 1
How does the Directory of Open Access Books navigate challenges to instill trust and transparency. Part 1 of 2.
How does the Directory of Open Access Books navigate challenges to instill trust and transparency. Part 1 of 2.
The French Open Science Monitor Initiative shows a path toward improving recognition of data sharing and open science assessment.
Vannevar Bush’s “The Endless Frontier” served as both blueprint and symbol of the American research enterprise. His writings are worth re-examination, as the country grapples (again) with the relationship between science and the American public.
The NIH has answered the lingering questions about the future of the Nelson Memo. Not only is it still in effect, it’s being accelerated by six months. We asked the Chefs for their thoughts.
It is time for OA proponents to engage in public debate with academic associations, universities and national funding agencies, because the widespread use of academic content in AI models poses significant risks for the research ecosystem.
Academic libraries’ first and most fundamental obligation is to support the work of their host institutions. This doesn’t preclude global engagement, but may put constraints upon it.
Traditional metrics do not allow us to fully express how OA publishing benefits society; here’s a vision for the future of storytelling with usage data in scholarly communications.
Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., an independent publisher focused on cutting edge biotechnology research, has been acquired by Sage. In this interview, the company’s namesake shares her future vision of the company under Sage ownership as well as her reflections on over 40 years of STM publishing.
Before we plunge into 2025, a look back at 2024, a year of uncertainty in The Scholarly Kitchen.
India’s recently announced One Nation, One Subscription plan is in some ways an audacious step into the future and, in other ways, an embrace of the past. What are its implications?
On September 20, 2024, MIT Press hosted a workshop, Access to Science & Scholarship: An Evidence Base to Support the Future of Open Research Policy. I interviewed Amy Brand to discuss the goals and outcomes of the workshop.
DORA’s reaction to Clarivate’s decision to no longer fully index eLife (and, therefore, not to give it a Journal Impact Factor) seems inconsistent with both its and eLife’s public positions, and based on the mistaken belief that “disruption” is an absolute good in itself.
Robert Harington attempts to reveal inherent conflicts in our drive to be as open as possible, authors’ need to understand their rights, and a library’s mandate to provide their patrons with the enhanced discovery that comes with AI’s large language models (LLMs).
Pursuit of Green open access rather than Gold not only preserves the subscription system but also imposes hidden costs on readers.
Digital accessibility to the scholarly communications process is core to providing equitable access to the literature.