PLoS, Nature and the community backlash

PLoSJust a few days ago, an article by Declan Butler was published in Nature regarding PLoS‘ open-access publishing model. This article was not well accepted by various open access advocates and science bloggers in general.

Johnathan Eisen from The Tree of Life was the first (that I noticed) to responde to the article and then many others followed along the same line.

Shortly after, Timo Hannay posted a “take two” at Nature’s Nascent that seemed to settle things down.

What I find to be the most notorious aspect in this whole string of events is that there is quite a large community of science bloggers that are ready to offer their “peer-review” in situations such as these. Is this a good thing? I would like to believe so…

Anyhow, I’ve only mentioned a few of the reactions. You can find plenty more reactions over at Bora’s Blog Around the Clock.

Tags: , , , , , ,

  1. Greg Laden’s avatar

    I was just looking at the numbers of readers looking at these various posts. Compared to other events that seem to spark a lot of interest, this PLoS/open access discussion is drawing VERY little attention. Lots of people commenting, but not a lot of regular readers reading or looking.

    Reply

  2. Mike Chelen’s avatar

    The original article looks interesting, however due to Nature’s publishing model, the full text cannot be freely accessed, so it is hard to be sure %P

    Reply

Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>