Category: Publishing

Can we transform scholarly communication with open source and community‐owned infrastructure?|Learned Publishing

From Alison McGonagle‐O’Connell and Kristen Ratanin in Learned Publishing:

Preview:

When it comes to infrastructure, scholarly publishing has been slow to evolve, and recent consolidation has weakened the competitive landscape. Publishers are waking up to learn that their most valuable asset – their publishing pipeline and accompanying workflow data – is suddenly owned by a potentially competitive organization whose values may not align with their own. Options to break away are challenging due to contracts, vendor lock in, and migration costs.

When consolidation occurred in content, as larger publishers acquired smaller publishers, costs went up. The increasing consolidation in technology and services will likely drive the costs of the current platform vendors up as well and offer fewer choices. Small‐ and mid‐sized publishers are faced with a decision to try and operate independently or partner with commercial publishers or vendors. These partnerships increasingly challenge their core values, such as independence and autonomy, research‐driven mission and goals, and control over business models and workflow.

Continue reading here:

Source: Can we transform scholarly communication with open source and community‐owned infrastructure? – McGonagle‐O’Connell – 2019 – Learned Publishing – Wiley Online Library

Announcing “Mind the Gap,” a major report on all available open-source publishing software | The MIT Press

From the MIT Press:

Preview:

Mellon-funded report Mind the Gap: A Landscape Analysis of Open Source Publishing Tools and Platforms catalogs and analyzes all available open-source software for publishing and warns that open publishing must grapple with the dual challenges of siloed development and organization of the community-owned ecosystem

The MIT Press is pleased to release Mind the Gap: A Landscape Analysis of Open Source Publishing Tools and Platforms (openly published at mindthegap.pubpub.org), a major report on the current state of all available open-source software for publishing. Funded by a grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the report “shed[s] light on the development and deployment of open-source publishing technologies in order to aid institutions’ and individuals’ decision-making and project planning.” It will be an unparalleled resource for the scholarly publishing community and complements the recently released Mapping the Scholarly Communication Landscape census.

Continue reading here:

Source: Announcing “Mind the Gap,” a major report on all available open-source publishing software | The MIT Press

Preparing for Plan S: Answers to the top 10 journal publisher FAQs we’ve heard based on what is known now | Scholastica

From the Scholastica blog:

Preview:

For publishers, ready or not, Plan S is coming (which is fitting given that the S really stands for “shock,” as well as “science,” “speed,” and “solution”). If you still have questions about what Plan S is exactly and how it will affect the journals you publish or work with, you’re not alone. Here at Scholastica, we’ve been getting a lot of questions from our journal users about the overall aims of Plan S and the technical specifications. We decided to compile this FAQ blog post to provide answers to some of the most common questions we’ve heard based on the information available right now.

Continue reading here:
Source: Preparing for Plan S: Answers to the top 10 journal publisher FAQs we’ve heard based on what is known now

Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal | Nature.com

From Paul Wouters et al. in Nature.com:

Preview:

Global efforts are afoot to create a constructive role for journal metrics in scholarly publishing and to displace the dominance of impact factors in the assessment of research. To this end, a group of bibliometric and evaluation specialists, scientists, publishers, scientific societies and research-analytics providers are working to hammer out a broader suite of journal indicators, and other ways to judge a journal’s qualities. It is a challenging task: our interests vary and often conflict, and change requires a concerted effort across publishing, academia, funding agencies, policymakers and providers of bibliometric data.

Here we call for the essential elements of this change: expansion of indicators to cover all functions of scholarly journals, a set of principles to govern their use and the creation of a governing body to maintain these standards and their relevance.

Continue reading here:
Source: Rethinking impact factors: better ways to judge a journal

Open-Access Monographs: New Tools, More Access | EDUCAUSE

From Monica McCormick in Educause Review:

Preview:

We are in an era of significant change in the United States and Canada for publishing open-access (OA) scholarly monographs. Since most monographs are published by university presses, and most copies are purchased by research libraries, this article focuses on that community. The bulk of OA titles are older or out-of-print works, many funded by the Mellon/NEH Humanities Open Book (HOB) program, which enabled free access to backlist scholarly works. Under that program, about 2,500 books from 28 publishers are now OA. Meanwhile, new OA-only book publishers are, together with traditional scholarly presses and libraries, exploring innovative business models and technologies.

Continue reading here:

Source: Open-Access Monographs: New Tools, More Access | EDUCAUSE

Cengage and McGraw-Hill merge | Inside Higher Ed

From Lindsay McKenzie in Inside Higher Ed:

Preview:

“Publishers Cengage and McGraw-Hill Education yesterday announced plans to merge and operate under the name McGraw-Hill.

As two big players in an industry with few players at the top, the merger is significant. In addition to changing the dynamic between the biggest publishers, the merger could also represent a significant upheaval for college instructors and students who rely on Cengage and McGraw-Hill Education content.”

Continue reading here:

Source: Cengage and McGraw-Hill merge

Researcher to Reader (R2R) Debate: Is Sci-Hub Good or Bad for Scholarly Communication? – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Rick Anderson in The Scholarly Kitchen:

Preview:

“One plenary session of the 2019 Researcher to Reader (R2R) Conference was a debate on the proposition “Resolved: Sci-Hub is doing more good than harm to scholarly communication.” Arguing in favor of the resolution was Daniel Himmelstein, a postdoctoral fellow in genomics at the University of Pennsylvania. Arguing against it was Justin Spence, partner and co-founder of PSI Ltd., and the IP Registry.”

Continue reading here:

Source: Researcher to Reader (R2R) Debate: Is Sci-Hub Good or Bad for Scholarly Communication? – The Scholarly Kitchen

Open Access Toolkit: DARIAH’s practical recommendations to promote Open Access within the arts and humanities – DARIAH Open

From Erzsébet Tóth-Czifra Laurent Romary in DARIAH Open:

Preview:

Where can I find Open Access journals in my field? When and how can I share my article as a preprint? Does publishing Open Access necessarily involve paying processing charges? These are just some of the questions we are asking from ourselves when exploring the options for open dissemination of our research. In this post, which is the second part of our Open Access in the humanities blog series, we bring together recommendations, tools, platforms and other resources that you may find helpful in answering these questions. All of them are available for everyone, regardless of geographical or disciplinary background, and can be directly and easily included in the publishing workflows of our communities.

Continue reading here:

Source: Open Access Toolkit: DARIAH’s practical recommendations to promote Open Access within the arts and humanities – DARIAH Open

Public Domain Manifesto | COMMUNIA

From the COMMUNIA group:

“Public Domain, as we understand it, is the wealth of information that is free from the barriers to access or reuse usually associated with copyright protection, either because it is free from any copyright protection or because the right holders have decided to remove these barriers. It is the raw material from which new knowledge is derived and new cultural works are created.

 The Public Domain Manifesto aims at reminding citizens and policy-makers of a common wealth that, since it belongs to all, it is often defended by no-one. In a time where we for the first time in history have the tools to enable direct access to most of our shared culture and knowledge it is important that policy makers and citizens strengthen the legal concept that enables free and unrestricted access and reuse.”

Continue reading here:

Source: Public Domain Manifesto

Learned Publishing : Vol 32 , No 1 | Wiley Online Library

From Learned Publishing:

“In recognition of this 30th year of Learned Publishing, we invited contributions from a wide diversity of contributors who could bring an evidence base and fresh thinking to some of our most dearly held beliefs and current topics of debate.”

Browse the table of contents here:

Source: Learned Publishing : Vol 32 , No 1