Margaret Ann Armour at SSP 2016, Crossing Boundaries: Encouraging Diversity
Dr. Margaret Ann Armour’s keynote on diversity in academia and publishing, from the SSP’s 2016 Annual Meeting.
Dr. Margaret Ann Armour’s keynote on diversity in academia and publishing, from the SSP’s 2016 Annual Meeting.
Expectations of free content are entrenched, but artists, authors, and publishers are all hurting because of it. The basic problem? It’s leading to a lack of trust in the future.
An excellent book about humankind in general holds important fundamental insights for scholarly publishers, editors, and researchers.
What does it mean for libraries to be competitive and “entrepreneurial”? And is the very concept a Trojan horse for neoliberalism? Does it matter?
The general fragmentation of media and society has profound implications, and may explain to some extent the fragmentation being seen in higher education and scholarly publishing.
Duke University’s Sheila Patek makes an elegant argument in favor of funding basic research.
It’s a question that has lurked around the edges of our campfire for a while — what if publishers paid authors of research papers? Quickly, it becomes clear why this is very unlikely to happen — for financial, ethical, and practical reasons.
Robert Harington grapples with the lack of understanding by the publishing elites on all sides of shifting ideologies of an individual’s relationship to information on the web.
Robert Harington interviews Andrea Powell, Chief Information Officer at CABI, revealing an inspiring advocate and leader across publishing and technology sectors.
John Oliver offers a scathing look at the poor practices of media in scientific reporting.
Journals as communication vehicles that bind communities of practice are still important and well-regarded, but there are external forces changing them and our industry, along with a rising level of neglect, which may mean a harder future for them than ever. What might we lose? And how does this explain why change is so slow in coming?
A look back at the recent Open Scholarship Initiative conference, from several Scholarly Kitchen “Chefs” who attended.
Jimmy Kimmel presents a video on climate change, and wonders why the public is so resistant to scientific consensus.
After hundreds of manipulated images were detected across 40 scientific journals, the real work will be to correct the scientific record.
We’re in a thicket of stories proclaiming “science is broken” and that stealing articles isn’t stealing because, publishers. This cottage industry of journal bashing and science trashing has reached a crescendo. What drives it? And what more important stories are being missed in the maelstrom?