Attacks — both overt and covert — from OA advocates and NIH/NLM phantoms come in the wake of the posts revealing how eLife and PubMed Central coordinated activities and kept secrets.
Conflicts of interest at PubMed Central have been mismanaged, and seem to have led to loading the National Advisory Committee with Wellcome representatives, among other things.
When PubMed Central expedited eLife, PeerJ wondered why. Emails within PMC suggest they were tempted to help PeerJ in the same way. They even talked with eLife about how to handle things.
Circumstantial evidence has become direct evidence — that eLife requested publication in PMC; that PMC collaborated with eLife; that PMC sought to conceal its preferential treatment; and that systems and processes at the NLM regarding PMC inclusion are unclear and open to abuse and misuse.
The professional society is becoming unmoored from its publication benefits. Will publication benefits in an open access environment become a centerpiece of a new breed of membership organizations?
A new way to view journal content in PubMed Central casts journal branding aside for a uniform PMC approach.
Dame Janet Finch admits OA will cause problems for learned societies. What does that portend, especially when viewed alongside more backlash?
A recent exhortation to support post-publication peer-review with awards shines a light on the holes in both ideas.
The herd of social sharing sites in the sciences is being culled. And one — Mendeley — may be assimilated by Elsevier.
With the NFL playoffs at their peak, what better time to have a little fun at the expense of highly paid players?
In the follow-up to “What Are STM Publishers Doing Wrong?” we explore what STM publishers are doing right. It’s an impressive list.
A new proposal regarding federally funded data is leaked. What might a broad policy for public access mean?
The first of a two-part series, today we review a long and complicated list of things STM publishers are doing wrong. Tomorrow, we’ll explore the opposite question — what are STM publishers doing right?
F1000 Research has confusing review and publication practices, and doesn’t call itself a journal, yet is now going to be indexed by PubMed — further eroding the PubMed brand.
I forget exactly when I first came across the idea that environmental lead, leftover from decades of leaded gasoline, was a factor in mental acuity, violent tendencies, and potentially crime. It must have been at least 20-25 years ago. Since […]