| The Alliance for Taxpayer Access | |||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
In this section: Public access-related media reports: Stay up to date by subscribing to: Comments from the BlogosphereRecent Posts: April 9, 2008 September 24, 2007 September 21, 2007 September 9, 2007 August 26, 2007 August 24, 2007 July 22, 2007 July 20, 2007 July 20, 2007 July 20, 2007 July 20, 2007 January 30, 2007 January 30, 2007 January 28, 2007 "That's right. Hire an attack dog to tackle those radicals suggesting that science -- of all things -- should be about ideas rather than profits." January 28, 2007 "Let's see if understand this. While I work for these publishers for free, submitting the manuscripts that make up their journals and doing the peer review, my subscription fees and page charges are paying for a disinformation campaign. Why do we put up with this?" (Comment by Theodore Price) January 28, 2007 "From Thom Parks:
January 28, 2007 "It's actually not a 'free-information' movement, since U.S. citizens are funding substantial scientific research with their tax dollars (via NIH). So why shouldn't there be wider access to those research findings?" January 28, 2007 "The divisions could not be more clearly drawn. The people who produce the work, and the people who check the work for scientific accuracy, readability, appropriateness and suitability don’t get paid, the man does!" January 27, 2007 "The battle over public access to scientific literature stretches back to the late 1990s when Nobel Prize winner Harold Varmus began plans for PubMed Central—a repository for all research resulting from National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding—and, a few years later, launched the Public Library of Science (PLoS). These easily accessible journals and repositories have struck fear into the hearts of traditional publishers, who have enlisted the “pit bull” of public relations to fight back, reports news@nature." January 27, 2007 Here are a few takes with such lofty arguments that a nine year old would see through them.
January 27, 2007 "In a land of plenty, what does an industry premised on scarcity do? Enforce scarcity on a world that has never known it. And just as in the recording industry, Big Content has begun using scare tactics to convince academics that the free dissemination of ideas—the central ideal of our profession—is unethical." January 27, 2007 "Things just went from bad to terrible for the image of the Association of American Publishers. Rick Weiss in today's WPost spotlights the Association's hiring of "PR Pit Bull" Eric Dezenhall to help in their fight against patient advocates and members of Congress who are trying to require free access at academic journals to the results of federally financed research..." January 26, 2007 January 26, 2007 "Peer review is not threatened by free access; peer reviewers are uncompensated and do not represent a major cost for a journal...It is not uncommon for a scientific journal to charge an author to submit a manuscript, then to levy an additional hefty charge for publishing it, and then to levy a hefty charge for the privilege of reading the published work. In all that the peer reviewers do their work as unpaid volunteers." January 25, 2007 "The free information movement is really coming of age, if one is to judge by the enemies it's making. Nature has a doozy of an article out this week reporting that a group of scientific publishers, including Elsevier, Wiley and the American Chemical Society, have hired a notorious public relations gunslinger to fight back against those kooks who think scientific information should be freely accessible to all." January 25, 2007 More blogger comments on public access are tracked by the Open Access News Blog.
|
|||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||
|