Scholarly Kitchen Podcast: Peter Brantley on Annotating the Web
Peter Brantley of Hypothes.is talks about efforts to bring an open layer of annotation to the Web, and what they mean for scholarly communication.
Peter Brantley of Hypothes.is talks about efforts to bring an open layer of annotation to the Web, and what they mean for scholarly communication.
Revisiting a post from 2011 that called for evidence for a better understanding of access to the research literature.
Librarian Jeffrey Beall talks about his list of predatory open access journals, the potential pitfalls of article-level metrics, and more.
Scholarly Kitchen chef Alice Meadows discusses the challenges, and opportunities, for scientific societies in an Internet era.
Chef Phil Davis discusses the current state of the art in analysis of citation, usage, and other information sources, and some of the opportunities and challenges for bibliometrics in a data-rich era.
An advocate for alternative metrics for article impact takes stock of where they are now, and where they’re going.
Lars Bjørnshauge talks about where the DOAJ is going.
PubMed Central reduces article downloads from 14 biomedical society websites when articles are made freely available after embargo.
The public access policy for the OSTP is announced, and it is even-handed, realistic, designed for rapid implementation, and a sign that the OA movement has matured into one that can work collaboratively to move forward.
The CC-BY license is assumed to be an open access standard, but the situation is complex — for funders, authors, universities, and publishers of all types. Perhaps a less dogmatic approach would serve all parties better.
Editors have learned how to exploit a simple loophole in the calculation of the Impact Factor. Is it time to close that loophole?
Free services and open access are distorting the publishing world. Will the big only get bigger?
A new way to view journal content in PubMed Central casts journal branding aside for a uniform PMC approach.
A recent exhortation to support post-publication peer-review with awards shines a light on the holes in both ideas.
A flash mob of concern causes PLoS to reconsider a new policy on retractions.