PLoS' 2010 Progress Update — Pondering the Implications of a Watershed Year
PLoS turns its first surplus. What will this mean for an organization accustomed to acting like the rebel?
Guest Post – A Study of Commenting on PLOS Articles
Despite the near consensus about the popularity (or lack thereof) of commenting on academic articles, there is surprisingly little publicly available data relating to commenting rates. To address this, a team of academics from the Universities of Sheffield and Loughborough have recently published research into article commenting on PLOS journals. Simon Wakeling, Stephen Pinfield and Peter Willett report here on their findings.
Phil's Pick for 2010: The Unintended Use of a Blog Post
A traffic phenomenon from a post about PLoS ONE may indicate that impact factors are more important to authors than PLoS believes.
PLoS, Stakeholders, and Shareholders
PLoS has announced the departure of both its CEO and CFO, but has provided no explanation of what led to the management change. PLoS should explain the situation to all its shareholders.
Ask The Chefs: Where Does Open Access Go From Here?
Publishers, librarians, researchers, and funders all have a stake in Open Access. What happens next? See what the Chefs have to say.
Turbulence at PLoS — Two Key Executives Leave in Apparent Haste, Chairman of eLife Named New CEO
More on the shake-up at PLoS — how rare these types of departures are, why a board might make such a move, and how unsatisfactory every scenario but the most obvious becomes once you begin to run scenarios.
Is PLOS Running Out Of Time? Financial Statements Suggest Urgency To Innovate
The publisher is committed to financial sustainability. How it achieves it is an open question.
PLoS Releases Article-level Metrics
Moving beyond citations, publisher paints broader picture of quality with palette of performance indicators.
PeerJ — A PLOS ONE Contender in 2015?
PeerJ’s first Impact Factor is not expected to surpass 2.000. Without the scale of PLOS ONE, PeerJ may need to seek a larger, diversified buyer. What the journal has to offer other publishers is less clear.
PLoS’ Squandered Opportunity — Their Problems with the Path of Least Resistance
The Public Library of Science was once a radical force, but is now dependent on author-pays bulk-publishing for its livelihood, which introduces all sorts of problems for every journal publisher. What went wrong?
The Risks of Launching a New Services Business — Branding, Cash Flow, and the Fraught Start of PeerJ
PeerJ has the potential to create a divergent path to OA publishing, but its business model isn’t clear. As a service company, there are intangibles it needs to get right in the meantime.
The New Face of the Professional Society
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?
Countering the Über-Brands: The Case for the Megajournal
Many column inches – right here in the Scholarly Kitchen as well as elsewhere – have been expended on the megajournal and its successes and (perhaps more often), failures. But how might megajournals support the very real need for action to improve the transparency, reproducibility and efficiency of scientific research?
Poor Financials Pushes PLOS To Ponder Future Prospects
PLOS’ latest financial report depicts an organization trying to reinvent itself, focusing less on disruption and innovation and more on efficiency and collaboration.
The Natural Limits of Gold Open Access
Gold open access publishing has proved to be successful, but it has certain limitations. This essay probes what those limitations are, but it argues that OA’s limitations do not outweigh its strengths. Gold OA most usefully coexists with traditional publishing models.