Blog Demonstrates Alternative To Closed Academic Journals
from the open-knowledge dept
Academic journals have never been particularly big moneymakers, but they can offer successful contributors a certain amount of prestige. Still, it's never made much sense that these journals are so reluctant to open up their content to the public, potentially exposing contributing authors to a much wider audience. As it is, many interesting academic articles are locked behind prohibitively expensive paywalls. Any follow-on conversation is locked up as well, further reducing the value of the paper. The world of academic blogs isn't exactly a substitute for academic journals, although it does help bring some of these conversations out into the open, as well as offer professors an avenue to promote their research. Over at the popular law blog The Conglomerate, they're doing an interesting experiment, whereby several academics are discussing a paper that's been made open to the public. While you might not be interested in the subject itself -- Privatization and the Law and Economics of Political Advocacy -- the experiment offers a good opportunity to glimpse the kind of discussion that would occur among academics, usually behind closed doors. It would seem to behoove the world of academia to encourage more of these open discussions. Not only would it raise the profile of more professors, but it would continue to level the playing field, by eroding the dominance of a handful of elite universities and journals.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blogs
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
We've become full circle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not peer reviewed
The debate is quite similar to citizen journalism vs. more traditional models.
Please take a loot at our project!
Greg J. Smith
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: not peer reviewed
Greg J. Smith
Sure...I'll loot you're project...hehe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: not peer reviewed
Greg J. Smith
Sure...I'll loot you're project...hehe
Your project even!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think the days of true 'Universities' are gone - it's just a corporation that specializes in political agendas and revenue.
Nothing wrong with a business being a business - but the need is once again here - for public places where knowledge can truly be shared.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That said, for scientific and medical purposes, peer review is needed to protect - as much as possible - against poorly done research.
Once a peer reviewed scientific/medical paper is published, greater benefit is achieved by granting wide access, than restricting it. That would change the business model of the journals.
They can adjust - maybe by selling very low cost access via the web. Lots of cheap subscriptions vs. a few expensive ones.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
loot at me
Well, I guess there is a sliding scale as per the necessity of peer review. In arts writing, if an author wants to engage in bad scholarship their piece may be rejected by us, and they may be exposed as fools for propagating shoddy work. There aren't repercussions, I guess in more science or practice leaning periodicals I can understand the need for peer review. I don't necessarily think it is needed in arts and ideas writing. 2/3 or our content is music/audio art and visual art so there isn't even a precedent of peer review for them (aside from critique).. it is just the written content we are "lax" about compared to academic journals.
,g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Negative results
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's been done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
academic discussions behind closed doors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]