Should Open Access Journals Charge Submission Fees?
If submission fees result in a more sustainable business model, why are open access publishers opposed to the idea?
If submission fees result in a more sustainable business model, why are open access publishers opposed to the idea?
In anticipation of Peer Review Week, we’ve asked the Chefs their opinions on if and how peer review might change. Come tell us yours!
The “education as financial bubble” meme is spreading, and new facts and comparisons are emerging.
The journal brand has proven to be the great intangible asset of the scholarly publisher. Can publishers extend the reach and value of journal brands by supporting research materials beyond the version of record?
Demonstrating that Aristotle’s assertion “Nature abhors a vacuum” applies even to online resources, a recent report from WebSiteOptimization.com illustrates how Web 2.0 has created enough content and interactions to begin to fill the capacity generated by broadband access. Yet, broadband […]
When we talk about impact and metrics and understanding the customer, we are actually talking about surveillance data. We should have an open debate about what this means.
“Sound methodology” suggests an ideal match to a scientific question that never quite exists. So why do some publishers use it?
2016, The. Laughs. Just. Keep. Coming… This is a post about how events in the non-scholarly publishing world are going to have a very big impact on us. Question is, what are we going to do about what’s going on?
Hoping to woo authors away from commercial publishers, a group of biomedical science societies have launched a new alliance to promote the value of publishing in society journals.
Smaller independent and society publishers are finding it increasingly difficult to compete with the economies of scale around production, technology, and (most important) institutional sales that can be brought to bear by a large publisher. If you are a society that has been self-publishing for many decades, such effects may appear as only a recent headwind in a long publishing tradition. This headwind, however, is most likely not a temporary zephyr but rather a permanent fixture of the STM and scholarly publishing landscape, and one that will only increase in intensity. To understand why, it is helpful to look at the two vectors on which scale operates in STM and scholarly publishing: horizontal and vertical. While horizontal scale has long been the province of commercial publishers, society publishers are typically organized to take advantage of vertical scale. The headwinds are presently blowing along the horizontal plane, from the perspective of the society publisher.
An emerging duopoly for the new class of scientific research workflow products could marginalize publishers large and small to the benefit of the Big Two. This first of two pieces provides the strategic context, while tomorrow we will review options for those publishers at risk of being left behind.
A new interactive report on the research lifecycle designed to offer a deeper understanding of the state of scholarly metadata in 2023 is presented.
Nathan Mealey, Michael Rodriguez, and Charlie Barlow look at the state of Controlled Digital Lending.
The European academic sector has taken a stronger consortial negotiating posture, resulting in Big Deal cancellations. Today, equity investors and analysts want to know: Will this contagion spread from Europe to North America, resulting in global pandemic?
The sudden virtualization of conferences sparked a flurry of experimentation. It is now time to build the future of the scholarly meeting.