What’s Hot and Cooking In Scholarly Publishing
With CC Signals, Creative Commons wants to help authors put rules on use of their licensed content for AI training. The problem is, one of the licenses already permits free and unlimited reuse of that content, for any and all purposes. And the licenses are irrevocable.
We are out of office for the US holiday. In the meantime, maybe peruse a phenomenal new live music archive….
Today, we feature a friendly debate on the question: which parts of the research lifecycle should be more automated, and which require more of a human touch — and why?
In honor of Global Accessibility Awareness Day, today’s post shares results from an experiment with qualitative data analysis — demonstrating that, while AI can detect patterns, humans must decide what those patterns mean.
Research disciplines require institutions that create cohesion, uphold standards, and provide continuity over time. Scholarly societies are uniquely positioned to serve that role credibly and durably.
Publishers that lack a deliberate library relations strategy are making consequential decisions without important and useful community perspectives.
The threat of zero-click search makes organizational brand more important than ever and presents a huge opportunity.
Today we bring you a dose of Friday fun, with thanks to the National Trust.
A new report suggests the NIH’s promised APC caps will reduce global OA spending. But so far, funder efforts to control publisher and author behavior have largely been ineffective. Here’s why.
ScholarOne saw a submission surge in the first quarter of 2026 — evidence that AI is increasing the strain on peer review’s social contract with researchers.
Today’s guest post asserts that trust won’t be restored by “better messaging” alone, but via better incentives, more disciplined public communication, and really listening to the people who have walked away from us.
To honor the UK’s Mental Health Week, we take a look back at the Mental Health Monday posts in The Scholarly Kitchen with calls to action, practical tips, and tools for “taking ACTION.”
Today we announce The Scholarly Kitchen’s new style guide for Chefs and guest bloggers alike.
Today’s guest post proposes a method for identifying, measuring, and managing robotic usage of scholarly content.
Today’s post asks: If research is increasingly accessed through AI-generated summaries rather than via primary sources, then what does it mean to “engage with research” at all?
Today BioOne and Johns Hopkins University Press announced that they’re joining forces. Learn more in this interview with Lauren Kane, Barbara Kline Pope, and Wendy Queen