Back in 2009, I wrote a post about the death of the television schedule. In the post, I discussed shelf life versus participation value for content, highlighting the rare entertainment events like sports that continue to offer a semblance of […]
Do we as publishers, societies and libraries understand how to grapple with the needs of academics with such a range of cultures?
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.
A proposal for a community site to review author experiences at various journals suggests the need for a new player in the trust economy of journals.
Social networking and crowdsourcing have attributes that may make them both incompatible with the goals and process of science. Can we accept that?
As new metrics are explored, not everything equates to “impact.” Getting our terms right will help us get our thinking straight.
Using your brains to think of an idea and your skills to implement it? That’s the old-fashioned way.
The dark matter of social sharing may be visible now, thanks to some smart theory, not more data.
Hitting the wallet, watch, and workload makes more sense, but Science Exchange still has some details to iron out.
More proof that Google isn’t making us “stooopid” — rather, we’re just being human, and that’s OK.
The social media revolutions continues to roll onward.
Hype and marketing angles aren’t adequate ways to truly help real people succeed in the information age.
We talk about value chains and disintermediation. What if it’s a web, and it’s about reorientation and new intersections?