What we read this week (14 December)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ Labs.

Publishing Technology

Publishing

  • Create ‘rebuttal’ unit to counteract fake news, scientists told
    “In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Professor Massey and Professor Iyengar say that, in the US, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine could “form a consortium of professional scientific organisations to fund the creation of a media and internet operation that monitors networks, channels, and web platforms known to spread false and misleading scientific information so as to be able to respond quickly with a countervailing campaign of rebuttal based on accurate information through Facebook, Twitter, and other forms of social media”.”
  • What These Medical Journals Don’t Reveal: Top Doctors’ Ties to Industry

Innovation

What we read this week (7 December)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

Innovation

What we read this week (30 November)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

Academic research and Open Science

Innovation

  • How Amazon Innovates
    “At the heart of how Amazon innovates is its six-page memo, which is required at the start of every new initiative. What makes it effective isn’t so much the structure of the document itself, but how it is used to embed a fanatical focus on the customer from day one. It’s something that is impressed upon Amazon employees early in their careers.”

Around the web

 

What we read this week (26 October)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

Open access

Blockchain

Ian Mulvany has some useful notes from the RAVE publishing conference where Blockchain seems to have been discussed at length. The Columbia Journalism Review has a nice summary of a meeting about what can blockchain actually do for journalism which discusses many of the same issues. The final comments,

“Ultimately, the panel said, the fate of blockchain journalism may hang on on whether the community of journalists keeps asking the hard questions about how to ensure that blockchain-based journalism serves and informs the public—and that control of the technology doesn’t fall into hands of the few.”

echo Ian’s reflection, “The claim of independence, in my mind does, not hold water. I think that would lead to vendor lock in as I don’t think that publishers will implement this tech on their own, without some standardisation we are going to end up depending on a vendor.”

Innovation

Bill Buxton explains why Marcel Proust and TS Eliot can be instructive for computer scientists, why the long nose of innovation is essential to success in technology design, why problem-setting is more important than problem-solving, and why we must remember, as we design our technologies, that every technological decision we make is an ethical decision as well in the Microsoft Research Podcast.

And finally…

A pair of smart glasses that you might actually want to wear:

What we read this week (19 October)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

  • Scribd Bundles New York Times With E-Books, Audio Books for $13 a Month. I guess the focus on Institutional subscriptions or society membership within academic publishing means that these kind of product bundles for personal subscribers are less common. Would students go for membership bundles which include a range of subscriptions and products such as a Grammerly (a phenomenon that has a number of university staff staying getting a sub to improve your essays is a must have)?
  •  asks if publishers will syndicate their content on Scholarly Kitchen? The comments are particularly interesting. I find it somewhat intriguing that STM publishers, particularly those that run advertising, haven’t gone down the route of creating a publisher alliance for access/data collection.
  • Elsevier Connect published the HEADT Centre article Combating image misuse in science: new Humboldt database provides “missing link” by Dr, Thorsten Beck. We’re sure that automated image checking will become routine within a few years, the real question is will there be an open solution or will all publishers need to purchase a service from Elsevier or one of the other big players to handle this?
  • Financial Times launches a new tool to help ‘knowledge-hungry’ subscribers track their reading  “The tool will track the articles that subscribers read, giving them an indication of the amount of information they have read on a topic, and suggesting further reads to them….”It’s about putting people in control of their knowledge-building process by allowing them to track progress on topics,” said Webb. Every article is worth a certain amount of points, displayed at the top of the page. When a reader gets to the bottom of the article, they will see four dots which flow into a progress bar, showing them how much they have now learned on that particular topic.”  It will be really interesting to see how many readers take advantage of this service and if the FT can really generate revenue from this service through increased usage.
  • Civil’s token sale closed without them hitting the $8 million minimum that they wanted to raise.  Using cryptoeconomics to create an open marketplace for journalists and citizens is an interesting business model. However, using the following helpful flowchart it’s less clear if blockchain technology is really needed for their newsroom platform.  (Does anyone know if this flowchart is really from the Department of Homeland security? We haven’t been able to find the original document). There are some really interesting STM applications being developed using blockchain technology such as Frankl, Blockchain for Peer Review, Orvium, etc. but we’re not convinced any of these really need to be built using blockchain tech.
  • The Journal of Informetrics has published a systematic comparison of Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus and found:
    “GS consistently found the largest percentage of citations across all areas (93%–96%), far ahead of Scopus (35%–77%) and WoS (27%–73%). GS found nearly all the WoS (95%) and Scopus (92%) citations. Most citations found only by GS were from non-journal sources (48%–65%), including theses, books, conference papers, and unpublished materials. Many were non-English (19%–38%), and they tended to be much less cited than citing sources that were also in Scopus or WoS.”

What we read this week (15 October)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing

Innovation

Health Tech

 

And finally…

  • 11 Scoops or 12? Coffee Wars Come to the Office  contains some great coffee war stories. “Victor Olausson, an IT consultant in Gothenburg, Sweden, said coffee arguments break out daily in his office. In one recent skirmish two colleagues faced off over whether to use 11 or 12 scoops of coffee in the office machine. They argued for 20 minutes about this,” Mr. Olausson recalls. Victory went to the employee holding the scoop.”

 

 

 

 

What we read this week (5 October 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing Technology

More on Plan S and the future of publishing

Health Technology

And finally…

What we read this week (28 September 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Publishing and peer review

Continue reading “What we read this week (28 September 2018)”

What we read this week (21 September 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members. This week the links are dominated by comments about Plan S but we wanted to give a shutout to the latest Trends report from Future Today Institute which contains all sorts of interesting Publishing Tech.

Plan S

Continue reading “What we read this week (21 September 2018)”

What we read this week (14 September 2018)

Welcome to Things we read this week, a weekly post featuring articles from around the internet recommended by BMJ’s Digital Group members.

Peer review

Artificial intelligence and machine learning

Continue reading “What we read this week (14 September 2018)”

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑