Open Science 2.0 must focus not only on access, but also on trust, interpretation, learning, and effective communication. The challenge facing the scholarly publishing ecosystem is ensuring that what is open is also trustworthy, understandable, and genuinely useful.
Today’s post asks us to acknowledge the role of AI in peer review and ensure practical guidance and policies that help scholars respond with consistency and confidence.
The future of scholarly communication will not be determined by how powerful AI becomes, but by whether the research community remains clear about the purpose those capabilities are meant to serve and whether it can govern them together.
Today, we reprise the talk by outgoing SSP President Rebecca McLeod at last month’s SSP Annual Meeting.
While it’s true that AI may be viewed as “legitimate,” it’s far from universally loved. Understanding that distinction tells us something important about how the technology may ultimately be adopted — and governed — within academia.
Today’s post explores what happens to the scholarly content platform when AI agents become the users.
We asked some of the attendees of the recent SSP Annual Meeting in Chula Vista, CA, to answer the question: “What are some takeaways from your experience at SSP 2026?”
Today’s guest post asserts that AI infrastructure will let publishers truly leverage machines, while brand and community are what will keep them meaningful to humans.
The Chefs offer their reflections on last week’s SSP Annual Meeting.
China’s publishing ambitions create genuine competitive pressures, but they also open opportunities for collaboration and highlight challenges that neither side can address alone
A powerful way to quantify article quality has been hiding in plain sight. It’s time to bring data citations into the limelight.
Today’s post shares the results of an initiative designed to answer the question: what would it actually take to build a publishing model fit for the research ecosystem we have now, rather than the one we inherited?
For scholarly publishers, the user has changed faster than the systems designed to serve them, and the gap between the two is where most of the difficult work is happening.
Research disciplines require institutions that create cohesion, uphold standards, and provide continuity over time. Scholarly societies are uniquely positioned to serve that role credibly and durably.
Today we bring you a dose of Friday fun, with thanks to the National Trust.