Readlists from Arc90 A Readlist is a group of web pages—articles, recipes, course materials, anything—bundled into an e-‐book you can send to your Kindle, iPad, or iPhone.
STM increasingly “push to publish”: WordPress : Annotum > PLoS Currents An open-‐source, open-‐process, open-‐access scholarly authoring and publishing platform based on WordPress
Expensive commercial publishing infrastructures are out of date, and aﬀordances no longer as valued.
“… [t]o shut down the operating system of print-‐organized scholarly research and communication.” -‐ Jerome McGann, Profession 2011, pp. 182–195 (14)
PeerJ (Peter Binﬁeld, Jason Hoyt): $99, $169, $259 lifetime membership. Scholars must contribute annually in review, comment, or submission to maintain status.
Easy to play in the “adult” world: Has an ISSN, will assign DOIs, use ORCID. Will archive in CLOCKSS, PubMedCentral.
“… [w]e have a new type of publication model which allows us to knowingly strip out what is extraneous to the process of publication, allowing us to pass those savings back to the customers (the authors).” -‐ Pete Binﬁeld, PeerJ http://scienceblogs.com/confessions/2012/06/12/interview-‐with-‐peter-‐binﬁeld-‐and-‐jason-‐hoyt-‐of-‐peerj/
Gold Open Access, CC-‐BY, authors retain copyright. PloS One, Hindawi, BMC, PeerJ, but also supported by mainstream publishers e.g. Springer.
Re-‐consideration of curation, peer review. Open submission over selection (PLoS One, PeerJ, arXiv). Open peer review over closed (BMC, PeerJ). “Altmetrics” used to deﬁne worth.
“Biggest development in scholarly communication isnt a [business] model but rather the sense that its impossible to judge importance ahead of time” -‐ Dan Cohen, Center for History and New Media https://twitter.com/dancohen/status/212717007802601473
Arguably the ultimate measure of success for a journal such as PLoS One is to put itself out of business. Every academic dept … its own journal.
“We believe that the need for PeerJ, or any other publisher, in the future will be to provide tools and services that genuinely add value to the end-‐to-‐end publishing process …” -‐ Pete Binﬁeld, PeerJ http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-‐topic/digital/content-‐and-‐e-‐books/article/52512-‐scholarly-‐publishing-‐2012-‐meet-‐peerj.html
Easy to marry institutional “Green” OA repositories with new publishing tools. arXiv : physical sciences SSRN : social sciences, law philpapers : philosophy RePEc : economics
With web based tools and services, network based economies … academic/research publishing can “detox” the system of the money that now runs it.
Maybe a 5-‐10 year transition to ease out subventions and migrate to community-‐ based publishing.
Every university, its own publishing platform. Every author, their own publishing tools.
peter brantley director, bookserver project internet archive @naypinya (twitter, gmail)