David Dobbs on the importance of open-source science

Right now, most scientific research exists behind paywalls. And expensive paywalls at that. A license to read a single peer-reviewed journal article can set you back $50. Depending on the journal, that number might be a little lower, or a little higher, but access usually doesn’t come cheap … even if the research was funded with public money. When I write about a paper, I usually have to request a copy from the researcher before I can even know whether the paper in question is one I want to write about. And it’s not just journalists that get locked out. Even scientists themselves can’t always get access to the papers they need to read in order to do their jobs. New science is being stifled by the old business of scientific publishing, argues science journalist David Dobbs.

Open-access journals are different. These publications—the most famous being the Public Library of Science, or PLoS—make all the papers they publish available to anyone online, rather than printing expensive paper copies for subscribers. In a great article at his Neuron Culture blog, Dobbs makes the case for open-access science:

via BoingBoing – David Dobbs on the importance of open-source science

Philip Roth Wins Man Booker Intl Prize

Philip Roth has won the Man Booker International Prize. Booker judge Carmen Callil was so annoyed with the decision to honor Roth, she resigned from the judging panel.

“I don’t rate him as a writer at all. I made it clear that I wouldn’t have put him on the longlist, so I was amazed when he stayed there. He was the only one I didn’t admire – all the others were fine,” said Callil … “Roth goes to the core of [Booker judges Justin Cartwright and Rick Gekoski’s] beings. But he certainly doesn’t go to the core of mine … Emperor’s clothes: in 20 years’ time will anyone read him?”

The thing is, people are still reading Goodbye, Columbus, which Roth wrote over 50 years ago. So, yeah, I think his work will be around in 20 years. It doesn’t make any sense to ask if his work will stand the test of time when it already has.

via Jessa Crispin

Boston Globe vs. B&N.com: Where is the future home for book reviews?

Earlier this year The Boston GlobediscontinuedKatherine A. Powers‘s longtime literary column ”A Reading Life.” The column was later resurrected at The Barnes and Noble Review. Reading Powers’s third column at her new home, a review of Erik Larson‘s In The Garden of the Beasts, it struck me how this move—ostensibly from a 100+ year-old, 21-Pulitzer newspaper to a glorified book chain blog—was clearly a step up rather than down. For example, consider design. Powers’s last column at The Boston Globe was a pitiful sliver of text surrounded by garish ads. Perhaps the print version redeems it, but at least in its online incarnation, there is nothing to suggest care or seriousness in the Globe’s presentation.

Boston Globe vs. B&N.com: Where is the future home for book reviews?, via MOBYLIVES.

A look at the news and events happening in the Libraries at Waubonsee Community College