The Walls Around Us — Why Cambridge University Press’ Predicament Demands Attention
The recent attempt by China to censor scholarship points to a growing set of challenges in information dissemination. Blaming the publisher obscures these issues.
Revisiting: Is Access to the Research Paper the Same Thing as Access to the Research “Results”?
Is access to the research paper really the same thing as access to the research results themselves? What about patents on publicly funded research? Revisiting a 2013 post to re-examine these questions.
Trust Falls — Are We In a New Phase of Corporate Research?
Conflicts of interest and corporate-funded research have expanded, with journals increasingly used by mega-corporations to advance their initiatives. What will this mean for scholarly publishing?
Book Review: Printer’s Error: Irreverent Stories From Book History
Robert Harington reviews a delightful new book that reminds you of how delightful our publishing world can be. Printer’s Error: Irreverent Stories From Publishing History by Rebecca Romney and J. P. Romney.
Ask The Chefs: If You Were Starting A Publishing Operation Today, Which Core Competencies Would You Consider Critical?
Editorial excellence? Agility? Data analytics? Customer focus? UI/UX? What are the most critical core competencies for publishers today? We asked the Chefs and we’d like your answer too!
Pace Intellectual: Could Publishing Embrace Slow?
A recent book took aim at accelerating administrative demands and the internalized expectation of measurable productivity that have eroded the quality of academic life and work. Is there a corollary for scholarly publishing?
What Does Transparent Peer Review Mean and Why is it Important?
The theme of this year’s Peer Review Week is transparency in peer review. Learn what the four speakers at the September 12 PRW panel session on this topic think this means and why it’s important.
The Scholarly Kitchen Podcast Episode 23: Jeffrey Mervis on the State of Science in the Trump Administration
The change of administrations in the United States was only 6 months ago but seems like much longer. Many things have changed in Washington with regard to science policy and the new administration’s orientation to science. Jeffrey Mervis, senior correspondent at Science magazine, talks with podcast host Michael Clarke about what has changed, what has not changed, and the implications of it all for science.
Missing the Target: The UK Scholarly Communications License
The UK Scholarly Communications License repeats many of the stumbles of the original monolithic and mandatory OA policies. We urge its proponents to slow down and learn from them instead.
Trouble at Hand — How Mobile Devices Perpetuate Weak Business Models
The rise of mobile is cementing business model expectations and driving new monopolies, but the ethics, incentives, and consequences of these models need to be considered.
Cell Theory and the Feuds Behind It
A look at the many personality conflicts behind the establishment of Cell Theory.
Defining a New Content Type: The Exploratory Resource
Scholarly publishers have long thought in categories such as journals, monographs, textbooks, and reference. Reference as a category is splitting in two.
Tracking the Evolution of Reference Resources
A new study from Oxford University Press further documents the decline of reference resources, a category of scholarly material more than ready for an innovative era in its evolution.
Ask The Chefs: If You Were A VC Investing In Scholarly Communications, Where Would You Be Placing Your Bets?
How do you know which technologies, tools, or best practices to incorporate into your organization? What if you had money to invest? Where would you place your bets? This month, we asked the Chefs that question. Come see what they said.
Study Reports Open Peer Review Attracts Fewer Reviews, Quality Suffers
Open online review has the potential to attract many more eyes to a new piece of research than conventional peer review. In reality, it may do far worse in attracting the eyes you want.