Darnton, Coppola, and the Impossibility of Free Information
“Free” is an illusion and an insult. All information we want costs money, and we as creators want it to cost money.
“Free” is an illusion and an insult. All information we want costs money, and we as creators want it to cost money.
Within a few short years, China has become an economic and scientific powerhouse. Watch the dynamic bubble plot.
With the economic benefits of open access open to reinterpretation, will the moral benefits prove sufficient to withstand the coming scrutiny? And will it all begin a race to the bottom?
If submission fees result in a more sustainable business model, why are open access publishers opposed to the idea?
The models we use to describe the publishing business need to change, and we can learn from software companies and digital distributors.
Economic turmoils continue to rock academia. University presses are feeling the pinch. How are European presses adapting?
Is open access publishing prone to vanity press behavior? A recent study provides questionable results.
Is peer review in decline? Evidence from the field of economics suggests that top authors are bypassing the journal certification process and distributing their papers on their own. Will other authors follow?
Joe Esposito’s new article in the Journal of Electronic Publishing is not your typical Open Access diatribe loosely held together with non-sequiturs, nor is it a pronouncement of how-we-done-good in our company/library. It is a cogent argument based on the economic theory of attention.