The Open Scholarship Initiative: Talking a Good Game, But Can We Deliver?
A look back at the recent Open Scholarship Initiative conference, from several Scholarly Kitchen “Chefs” who attended.
The Open Access Monograph
There are many programs now to create open access monographs, but the business models surrounding these efforts do not appear to be sufficiently robust to make the OA monograph sustainable. The problem is that the monograph is something that many people want, but few are willing to pay for.
Sensationalism or Legitimate Worries? Examining the Cottage Industry of Journal Criticism and Science Alarmism
We’re in a thicket of stories proclaiming “science is broken” and that stealing articles isn’t stealing because, publishers. This cottage industry of journal bashing and science trashing has reached a crescendo. What drives it? And what more important stories are being missed in the maelstrom?
University Press Redux: Preserving Heritage, Charting The Future
University presses are enjoying something of a renaissance in the UK, as was evident at the recent University Press Redux conference in Liverpool. Why is this, and how are presses trying to reconcile mission, innovation and sustainability in the digital world? And what can they teach the rest of us?
Ask The Chefs: What Is The Biggest Misconception People Have About Scholarly Publishing?
What is the biggest misconception people have about scholarly publishing? That’s what we asked the Chefs this month. Now we’re asking you. What did we miss?
Library-Institution Misalignment: One Real-World Example
There seems to be a significant disagreement between academic libraries and their own host institutions with regard to an important rule change proposed by the Department of Education. That disagreement has implications that go way beyond the rule itself.
Complexity and Misrepresentation in the New York Times
Robert Harington comments on a New York Times article by Kate Murphy , published on Sunday 13th March, 2016, suggesting that when journalists write such an article they, do not fan the flames of fundamentalism, recognize the complexity at hand, and understand that there is a constructive debate to be had.
Guest Post, Fred Dylla — Three Years after the OSTP Public Access Directive: A Progress Report
On the three year anniversary of the OSTP Public Access memo, AIP’s Fred Dylla takes a look at the significant progress made.
Co-opting “Official” Channels through Infrastructures for Openness
Last week, the news broke about a new service called DOAI that is designed to support open access. It is not a publishing model or a repository but rather a type of infrastructure. When a user inputs a DOI, DOAI connects […]
A Possible Game-Changer for Open Educational Resources?
Amazon is reportedly poised to get into the open educational resources game. This could be huge, and not just for the most obvious reasons.
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to OA
As digital piracy goes large scale, publishers, libraries, and the open access movement have a lot at stake.
The Illicit Love Affair between Open Access and Traditional Publishing
At the recent PSP conference there was a panel on the cost of complying with the many new open access mandates from funding bodies. The panel explored the cost of compliance and how to reduce those costs. The current regulatory regime is complicated and administratively expensive, but the mandates will continue to be promulgated because the people calling for them are not the ones that have to implement them.
Royal Historical Society Moves into Open Access Monographs
A new OA monograph series takes a discipline-specific approach to funding, licensing and editorial work.
What Should We Make of Secret Open Access Deals?
A spate of open access “big deals” marks a shift from global offsetting to local offsetting. But the secretive nature of these deals makes them difficult to interpret.
An Interview with Jeffrey Beall
An interview with librarian and open access skeptic Jeffrey Beall. He discusses his work, the criteria for declaring an organization a “predatory publisher,” and how he would fix the scholarly communications system.