“DotComs to Watch”: Scholarly Publishing’s Tech-Company Beauty Pageant

“DotComs to Watch”: Scholarly Publishing’s Tech-Company Beauty Pageant

It struck me at the STM Innovations meeting in London in December 2015 that I was watching a type of panel session I had seen before: speakers from a handful of “dotcoms” were arranged in front of the audience like contestants in a beauty pageant. They each had five minutes to convince the audience of their bona fides: how they were going to change the world, or at least improve the lives of our research authors.

And then I recalled that I had been a pageant finalist a few months before, at the ALPSP 2015 Annual Meeting  with four minutes to explain why my product, Continue reading

Augmented Intelligence in Scholarly Communication: The Machine as Reader

Augmented Intelligence in Scholarly Communication: The Machine as Reader

This past January I was in Berlin for APE 2016 (“Academic Publishing in Europe”). I was both a keynote speaker, and a first time attendee.   Several others have blogged summarizing the meeting (Kent Anderson of Caldera Publishing Solutions has two posts, on Day 1 and Day 2; Fiona Murphy of Maverick has blogged for ALPSP on the meeting).   There was a lively twitter flow, under the hashtag #APE2016.   It was an excellent meeting for looking at both challenges and opportunities out well into the future.   The perspectives on challenges and opportunities are different in Europe from in the US – perhaps surprising because scholarship and publishing are so internationalized.   I look forward to the presentation videos being posted!  [Update: the videos are now posted to the APE2016 videos page.]

My keynote, “Friction in the Workflow: Where are we Generating More Heat than Light?”, covers a wide range of friction-producing challenges that researchers hit in moving through today’s researcher workflow: Continue reading

Is Publishing What We Do, or How We Do It?

Is scholarly communication our goal, and scholarly publishing just the technology we use to accomplish this goal?

Industries should avoid being so identified with a technology that they can’t weather a transition.   It is a wonder that scholarly publishing – a tradition-based or even –bound industry, many would say – made the transition from print to online. Some other industries had trouble enough with the “digital transition” that those industries were restructured: retailing, music, news, etc.

But it is important for scholarly publishing’s future that – just as it avoided being defined by a technology like “print” – it doesn’t get defined by a technique, or a business model, either. Continue reading