The Wrong Approach: Harrisburg University Bans Social Networking to “See What Happens”
A provost sees multi-tasking in his home, and decides to make his university suffer — all because he took the wrong lesson to heart.
A provost sees multi-tasking in his home, and decides to make his university suffer — all because he took the wrong lesson to heart.
The infrastructure for change is in place and largely working. What might that mean for publishing and academic cultures? (The first of a four-part series.)
Social media takes a leap among older adults. Is it because they were once young Internet adopters?
Open blogging networks may be impossible to commercialize, for a host of reasons.
Despite OCLC’s legal woes, and no matter how the court of law decides, the court of user opinion may be the determining factor in OCLC’s future.
Clay Shirky’s new book is smart, snappy, and insightful. You should read it if you want to understand why people are adding social media to their lives.
The Research Information Network’s new report on researchers and Web 2.0 offers a similar set of results to previous studies: uptake is relatively low, and the trustworthiness and quality of online resources are suspect. The report offers contrary evidence to common myths about “digital natives” and some useful advice for anyone looking to build social media.
The science blogosphere erupted in a furor this week, when Seed Media’s ScienceBlogs announced a new blog–Food Frontiers, a paid, sponsored blog about nutrition written by employees of PepsiCo. Multiple bloggers either suspended their blogs or quit ScienceBlogs altogether over their concerns that adding this blog undermined the credibility of the platform and their credibility as individual writers. Eventually, ScienceBlogs caved under the pressure and removed Pepsi’s blog. Did ScienceBlogs sell out to commercial interests, or was this just a continuation of what they’ve always done?
Reputation — fragile, cumulative, and indirect — is the reward of science. Direct compensation to motivate specific behaviors is a dangerous proposal.
Scientists seem uninterested in participating in social media offerings, as the rewards offered are generally of insufficient value to warrant the effort required. Instead of just hoping that scientists will suddenly see the value in your product, why not offer incentives for participation?
Twitter and Ning are both tremendously popular online tools-but popularity does not immediately translate into revenue. While the two companies are in decidedly different positions, each is trying to find a way to monetize all that traffic.
As science publishers, we hear a lot about the potential for new technologies. Often this comes in the form of a pitch from someone looking to sell you on either the technology they’re offering or on their expertise. In trying to see through the salesmanship, it’s important to have some general rules of thumb for approaching the integration of social media as tools for the research science community.
A recent study points out that science blogs are failing to provide much in the way of community outreach and education to the non-scientist public. Is this really a failure, or is it an unrealistic expectation?
One of the great benefits of the Internet is how it has extended our cultural memory. But has this also stolen our freedom of thought, our ability to create original works of art?
Google Buzz has dragged Gmail into the social sphere. Will it be a match made in heaven? Or does it remind users of someplace farther south?