[Oa-italia] Due articoli su PlanS e uno sulla comunicazione scientifica

Elena Giglia elena.giglia a unito.it
Mar 5 Mar 2019 21:39:08 CET


Buonasera,
segnalo:
1) *Robert Jan Smits sul futuro di PlanS*
https://www.researchresearch.com/news/article/?articleId=1380142

he thinks some of the arguments against Plan S have been “unfair”. He
reserved his greatest ire for accusations that Plan S will prevent
Coalition S-funded researchers from collaborating with people who do not
face restrictions on where and how they can publish.

“I thought that scientists work together across borders to extend the
frontiers of knowledge and solve problems for society,” he said. “If now
scientists tell me that they will not cooperate anymore if they are not
allowed to publish behind a paywall, I think we have a serious problem with
the role of science in our society and we probably have got to have a more
fundamental debate.”
2) *Jon Tennant su PlanS*,
versione breve su LSE
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/03/05/plan-s-time-to-decide-what-we-stand-for/
e versione lunga sul suo blog,
http://fossilsandshit.com/reflections-on-plan-s/
Vi si legge fra l'altro:
The whole point of Plan S was to disrupt the status quo and transform the
world of scholarly publishing. If it yields to those who it is trying to
disrupt, at the cost of the greater good, than that’s not exactly progress.
Open Access is not a business model, so let us stop treating it as such. I
believe that science can help us shape the world to be better, and can help
solve the enormous problems that our planet currently faces. I do not
believe that having it under the control of mega-corporations and elite
individuals or institutes helps to realise this, or is in the principles of
fundamental human rights.

3) *Un articolo del Guardian sul sistema attuale di comunicazione
scientifica*,
The Guardian view on academic publishing: disastrous capitalism
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/04/the-guardian-view-on-academic-publishing-disastrous-capitalism
?

Scientific publishing has long been a licence to print money. Scientists
need journals in which to publish their research, so they will supply the
articles without monetary reward. Other scientists perform the skilled and
specialised work of peer review also for free
<https://gowers.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/elsevierstatementfinal.pdf>,
because it is a central element in the acquisition of status and the
production of scientific knowledge.

With the content of papers secured for free, the publisher needs only find
a market for its journal. Until this century, university libraries were not
very price sensitive. Since academic careers depend on publication, the
demand for scientific publications is unbounded except by the price that
scholarly libraries can be forced to pay. Scientific publishers routinely
report profit margins approaching 40% on their operations, at a time when
the rest of the publishing industry is in an existential crisis.
Buona serata

eg



-- 
dr. Elena Giglia
UnitÓ di progetto Open Access
Direzione Ricerca e Terza Missione
Universita' degli Studi di Torino
tel. +39.011.670*.4191*
Skype: egiglia
www.oa.unito.it

*NOAD OpenAIRE Italy*
https://www.openaire.eu/
noad-it a openaire.eu
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML Ŕ stato rimosso...
URL: <http://liste.cineca.it/pipermail/oa-italia/attachments/20190305/854ca721/attachment.html>


Maggiori informazioni sulla lista OA-Italia