future_of_monographic_books_bunz_open_accessThe following open access article in Insights: the UKSG journal, written by Dr. Mercedes Bunz, Director of the Hybrid Publishing Lab at the Centre for Digital Cultures (Leuphana University), evaluates the current state of academic book publishing based on the findings of the Hybrid Publishing Lab’s business model research. Continue Reading…

In the ever-changing digital world, it is not surprising that words are constantly created to describe new processes online. #platisher has been one of those words for a while, which makes this weeks link collection to be all about this mixture of publisher and platform.

This week starts off with Porter Anderson contemplating on the “Mystery of the Hybrid”. In his article on thoughtcatalog, Anderson discusses whether or not self-publishing seems to be the way to publish in future and if traditional publishing will soon be history.

Brands and prominent users like comedian Rainn Wilson are complaining about Facebook’s algorithm changes and how that forces them to pay money to reach their fans and followers. Mathew Ingram talks about what happens when companies can decide what is signal and what is noise. Read the full article on GigaOM.

In another article, Ingram also describes how non-profits and advocacy groups are expanding their ability to produce their own journalism in much the same way that brands and advertisers have been, calling them “almost journalists” – a term media-watcher Dan Gillmor introduced to describe agency-driven information curation. Read the full article here.

Karen McGray addressed the problem of separating content from form online. Inviting other users to comment she opened a discussion with questions of what that actually meant and asked for thoughts, examples, stories. Read the whole discussion here.

On Digiday, Ricardo Bilton writes about publishers welcoming a new era of visibility. The Media Rating Council in the US has now set a standard for something they call “viewability”, content, in this case advertising, is only “viewable” if at least 50% of it is seen for one second or more. What this means for the publishing world? Find out here.

More expensive than science allows. University of Konstanz cancels license negotiations with scientific publisher Elsevier

Elsevier has released a statement on charging for open access papers. In the article they address the unnecessary payments that customers have had to make in the past and respond to allegations by building a new open access platform which will be available from summer 2014.

Neil Selwyn of Monash University in Melbourne has posted an essay on how the internet has changed education. He describes the internet as an educational tool and discusses how we should understand the potential gains and losses of what is being advanced when using it as such.

There has been a ChatLiteracy discussion on “navigating the complexities of open access” going on since Monday. It will continue with sessions exploring different experiences with open access today and tomorrow from 12.00 to 14.00 (GMT). Join in here.

Michelle Sidler has written a paper on how the Open Science movement has been successful in transforming disciplines traditionally associated with science. She connects the ‘three cultures’ of science with each other and demands open knowledge platforms that serve to include academic disciplines into these cultures that do not self-identify as science. Read all about it here.

The University of Waikato has become the first university in New Zealand to approve a mandate around open access to academics’ publications. Under the guidelines, academic staff can disseminate their research as widely as possible, bringing research results out from behind the subscription paywall to be accessed by all. Here are all the details.

Classic books scanned and available freely to read online via the U.S. Library of Congress

The following update on what has been happening in the OpenAccess universe is mostly taken from the openaccessbutton blog.

Kevin Smith, Scholarly Communications Officer at Duke University, reviewed Dr. Erin McKiernan‘s talk from SPARC 2014, saying that, “After listening to her expression of such a heartfelt commitment … I began to realize that, in reality, OA is the only choice.”

Hebrew Studies is now open access with content after 1990 being made available through the Free Library platform.

Dr. Peter Murray-Rust blogged “Elsevier are still charging THOUSANDS of pounds for CC-BY articles.”Murray-Rust found that many open access CC-BY articles were labeled as “All rights reserved” and users would be charged hefty sums for permission to reprint the articles.

Dominque Babini discussed open access initiatives in the Global South.

MIT celebrates the fifth anniversary of their Faculty Open Access Policy. Readers regularly download MIT authored articles from DSpace@MIT. 38% of the access is from the United States, with heavy use from China, India, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Republic of Korea, Japan, and France, in that order.

PLOS clarified part of their new data sharing policy.

The National Institute for Materials Science (NIMS, Japan) and IOP Publishing are have announced that Science and Technology of Advanced Materials (STAM) has adopted the Creative Commons license (CC-BY 3.0) for all articles published in the journal.

Times Higher Education reviewed PeerJ’s first year of the $99 open access model.

The American Sociology Association Council has voted to launch a new open access journal called Sociology Open with their publishing partner SAGE. The news has been met with an interesting discussion and criticism about the partnership and the possible “cloning” of the open access sociology journal Sociological Science.

Google’s anti-copyright stance is just a way to de-valuate content. That’s bad for artists and bad for consumers, says Kurt Sutter in a critical article published in slate magazine.

In this weeks hot links, PLOS – the largest scientific journal in the world – now requires that authors must make all data publicly available, without restriction, immediately upon publication of the article. The new data policy will apply from this month onwards and has received great support from the scientific community. read the full article here.

PLOS’ very own Martin Fenner is also holding a talk titled “Scientific Publishing: How to fix a broken system” in Berlin this month. He will be talking about article-level metrics on the 11th of March at the MDC-Berlin. See full details here.

A new open-access journal has been founded called The main idea is to provide a technical platform of peer-reviewing; its purpose is to promote the emergence of epijournals, namely open access electronic journals taking their contents from preprints deposited in open archives such as arXiv or HAL, that have not been published elsewhere.

Even startups have now added to the open access pool, with massive development in projects like coursera and udacity gaining momentum every day. Tech Crunch has released an article discussing the startup experiments with academic research, stating that the university golden age might not be over, it may have just begun. read the full article here.

“Ten Simple Rules” – a concentrated guide for mastering the professional challenges research scientists face in their careers

Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers

This week, the Accelerating Science Awards Programme brings us a best practice video showing several exceptional real-world application of open access. These examples demonstrate how the reuse of Open Access research can accelerate scientific progress and benefit society as a whole. watch the video here.

Another best practice example for open access is the responsive EPUB reading system called The system takes advantage of the abilities of modern web browsers to allow an attractive reading experience on all manner of devices. It is free for all to use and adapt.

Also, PLOS has a new blog called PLOS Opens. The blog focusses on how scholarly communications is changing, and how it should be changing. The big announcements will still be on the official PLOS blog and but at PLOS Opens policy, evidence, and opinion of how our world is changing will be put into focus.

Stuart Hall has died. And because of the great importance of his work, it seems necessary to at least mention him in our weekly linklist. In his obituary and tribute to Stuart Hall, Jeremy Gilbert reflects Halls achievements, as well as noting that the jamaican-born british theorist saw great importance in digital commons and open democracy. As Laurie Taylor, sociologist, broadcaster and Times Higher Education columnist says: “He was a committed and influential public intellectual of the New Left, who embodied the spirit of what the OU [Open University] has always stood for: openness, accessibility, a champion for social justice and of the power of education to bring positive change in peoples’ lives.” Read Jeremy Gilberts tribute here.

And as if to underline that there is still a long way to go, Turkey has passed a new law that, according to experts will only increase internet surveillance and enable the government to track down cyber dissidents more easily. Furthermore, it is believed that the turkish internet will increasingly become a channel for the government to channel knowledge, the exact opposite of the once envisioned never-ending open access paradise it was once envisioned as. Read on in the OpenDemocracy report.

A positive outlook is offered by Mark Carrigan who reports on the Participation Now project, “a new resource for exploring development and innovation in public participation initiatives.” Participation Now is collaborating with the OpenUniversity and OpenDemocracy. Carrigan has written a short summary of all your need-to-knows here.

This weeks hot topics in Open Access: What are the problems with peer review, open knowledge and open access, and can they be overcome?

Marjatta Sikström features two articles on peer review. The first by Richard Price, founder of critiques the small number of researchers per article that actually perform peer review. The second article has Randy Schekman calling out academic journals for “distorting the scientific process”. Sikström shortly discusses both articles and quotes further reading material here.

In the article Why I Don’t Care About Open Access to Research – and Why You Should Michael White discusses whether there are actual benefits to the scientific community in making work freely available and asks the question who open access really is for.

Lastly, Casey Brianza takes a critical look on what it means to publish open access, when all it actually generates is more costs for the public. In the article, she does not critique the praxis itself, but asks whether open access is actually successful at what it was set out to do. Follow up on her arguments here.

How can something so wonderful and right as “openness” further promote Neoliberalism?

Today is all about transforming digital humanities. While often questions arise around access and making infrastructure available, there is a growing need for critical review of digital research work. What does it mean to put your work online, to promote openness and access. Here are some critical views on digital academic work. Continue Reading…

In an attempt to gather information useful to us all, I present to you a weekly update on useful links in the digital humanities realm. This weeks focus lies on open access and new forms of scholarly communication in the digital age and includes links from @creativecommons @WellcomeLibrary and @copyrightcentre Continue Reading…