共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 38 毫秒
1.
In a time when university presses are struggling to survive and most require financial support from their parent institutions, RMIT Publishing – an electronic publisher from its inception in 1989 – has grown its annual sales from AU$2.8m in 2003 to an expected AU$6m in 2007. This 100% sales growth in five years has been achieved by RMIT Publishing's unique, context‐driven approach to electronic publishing. This approach has made RMIT Publishing the publisher of choice for Australian databases, aggregated scholarly content for the global market and now ‘born‐digital’ publications. 相似文献
2.
Has the challenge of unauthorized digital reproduction and distribution of copyright works been met by the use of so‐called ‘digital rights management’ (DRM) technology – and what role will DRM play in publishing, including scholarly journal and learned publishing? This article explores the legal and commercial issues surrounding DRM from its analogue origins through to the latest market developments. It argues that the implementation of DRM in other media sectors provides valuable lessons to publishers. Acknowledging the practical challenges that DRM has faced, the article suggests that whilst DRM will offer an answer to ‘the machine', it must form part of a flexible solution that adapts to the requirements of electronic publishing. 相似文献
3.
Richard Baggaley 《Learned Publishing》2000,13(1):53-57
This article looks at the general idea of developing journals by adding value. It focuses in particular on the notion of the ‘mature journal’ – possibly a mythical beast, but one which most publishing houses will have at least one of (even if they don't know it yet). The article touches on some run‐of‐the‐mill journal issues such as obesity, sex, and death, but will hopefully also throw new light on a corner of the publishing world previously thought of as ‘dull’. 相似文献
4.
Frederick J. Friend 《Learned Publishing》2003,16(2):153-155
The purchase ‘en bloc’ by library consortia of all journals published by one publisher – the so‐called ‘Big Deal’ – is bad for small publishers and for large libraries even if – in the short term – good for large publishers and for small libraries. The publishing and library communities need to find alternative purchasing models that provide better deals for those disadvantaged by the prevalence of the ‘Big Deal’ while retaining the benefit of scale in negotiation and supply. 相似文献
5.
Alison Baverstock 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(1):65-68
Key points
- Although ‘peer review’ has quasi‐sacred status, times are changing, and peer review is not necessarily a single and uniformly reliable gold standard.
- For publishers, peer review is a process not an outcome.
- Academics understand peer review, but are often ignorant about the quality checking mechanisms within wider publishing.
- Self‐publishing has led to the much wider availability of publishing services – these now being used by all stakeholders in publishing.
- How should universities evaluate comment and ideas that were first disseminated within a non‐academic market?
- Rather than an upper house, is peer review today more of a galley kitchen?
6.
Jennifer Kavinsky Hannifin 《Publishing Research Quarterly》1991,7(2):11-26
Have university presses shifted their focus toward trade books? It so, when did this shift occur and why? Changes in funding of research and education, in consumer spending and publishers' sales, and in trade publishers' attitudes toward “midlist” books are discussed as influential factors. The article also examines the way university presses define trade books and the impact of publishing trade books on university press lists. Finally, the article describes current trends in university press publishing. 相似文献
7.
Charles Watkinson 《Learned Publishing》2021,34(1):17-24
University presses occupy a distinctive field of publishing, heavily tied to the fortunes of the universities and colleges in which they are usually situated. COVID‐19 has catalysed their adoption of digital technologies; focused their commitments to social justice; and given new impetus to business models and formats that fully leverage the Internet, especially open access. Economic pressures on higher education that seem set only to increase are also driving university presses to more interdependent approaches and an emphasis on the contributions of the university press network to knowledge infrastructure for the humanities and social sciences. This article explores how university presses have reacted to the COVID‐19 pandemic, with particular reference to the experiences of the University of Michigan Press. It concludes that the diversity of types of university presses is one of the greatest strengths of this field of publishing and makes it resilient in a time of unprecedented change. 相似文献
8.
Jean-Pierre V. M. Hérubel 《Learned Publishing》2023,36(2):164-170
Academic book and journal publishing constitutes the majority focus of university presses. Besides commercial scholarly publishers, academic scholars and researchers view the opportunities provided by university presses as important venues for the dissemination of their research. This discussion focuses on the disciplinary imperative to publish scholarship that is ever more fluid and specialized as academic disciplines continue to become further nuanced in their response to the increasing knowledge produced by humanities and social science inquiry. The focus is on university presses and not commercial scholarly presses, although constitute a significant locus of scholarly publishing. What are the general characteristics of academic specialization and university press publishing? Further, how is disciplinary fluidity, especially evolving specialization, reflected in university press book publishing nomenclature and how scholarship is tied to the intellectual preoccupations of academic specialization? Multi- and inter-disciplinarities further articulate disciplinary publishing, accelerating disciplinary fluidity. Examples from disciplinary and emerging configurations of disciplinary nomenclature utilized by university presses offers insight into specialization and publishing. Academic history publishing is used to illustrate newly emerging fluid disciplinary configurations. 相似文献
9.
10.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2022,48(1):102481
The issue of ‘predatory publishing’, and indeed unscholarly publishing practices, affects all academics and librarians around the globe. However, there are some flaws in arguments and analyses made in several papers published on this topic, in particular those that have relied heavily on the blacklists that were established by Jeffrey Beall. While Beall advanced the discussion on ‘predatory publishing’, relying entirely on his blacklists to assess a journal for publishing a paper is problematic. This is because several of the criteria underlying those blacklists were insufficiently specific, excessively broad, arbitrary with no scientific validation, or incorrect identifiers of predatory behavior. The validity of those criteria has been deconstructed in more detail in this paper. From a total of 55 criteria in Beall's last/latest 2015 set of criteria, we suggest maintaining nine, eliminating 24, and correcting the remaining 22. While recognizing that this exercise involves a measure of subjectivity, it needs to advance in order to arrive – in a future exercise – at a more sensitive set of criteria. Fortified criteria alone, or the use of blacklists and whitelists, cannot combat ‘predatory publishing’, and an overhaul of rewards-based academic publishing is needed, supported by a set of reliable criteria-based guidance system. 相似文献
11.
‘The answer to the machine is in the machine’ – but what is the answer? At the end of the first decade of the 21st century we are seeing an explosion of rights management issues, as well as the emergence of many products and services that may provide all – or at least some – of the solution for publishers. International standards are also in place. Strong intellectual property protection is the cornerstone of an orderly digital marketplace. That market is for content + rights. Are our rights management practices fit for purpose? In this paper we provide an overview of rights management in publishing at the start of the 21st century, a summary of what is at stake, and an overview of the challenges and opportunities that await publishers. 相似文献
12.
Jan Velterop 《Learned Publishing》2003,16(3):167-169
In assessing the role that organizations of scientists with publishing activities – such as scholarly societies – can or should play in furthering the science and practice in their chosen fields, they face a dilemma: should they primarily be fund‐raising organizations for other activities in their disciplines, using their publications to bring in the necessary money, or should they be promoters of efficient scholarly communication and use their publications more directly to that end – for instance, by embracing ‘open access‘. 相似文献
13.
介绍4种国外数字学术出版模式,分别是虚拟图书馆模式、数字仓库模式、学术文集模式、学术社区模式,并分析各种模式的优点和弊端。指出数字学术出版模式处于发展变迁状态,其发展经验与前景为：数字学术出版市场主要集中于院校机构,而非个体消费者;数字学术出版物的发行并不会分流纸版书的销量;数字内容版权的不确定性、不透明性严重影响该领域的发展进程;学术期刊出版和学术专著出版有重叠领域,值得开发;出版商的生存和发展取决于所出版图书的价值和数字化系统开发。 相似文献
14.
传统出版企业数字化战略路径分析 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
数字化战略是出版业大势所趋,传统出版企业必须转型和适应方能获得持续发展。本文从战略思维的角度,简要分析传统出版业制定数字化战略的路径,并指出其中的关键问题。 相似文献
15.
Albert N. Greco 《Publishing Research Quarterly》1988,3(4):34-53
In this article the author addresses the abandonment of the mid-list trade book market by commercial publishing houses and the development of that market niche by entrepreneurially oriented but beleagured university press directors in the 1970s. How many presses are issuing trade books? Hard statistical data is difficult to obtain. Yet a review of university press catalogues reveals a surge of interest in this book area. However, this niche does not belong exclusively to university presses. Intense competition is now surfacing from new, small but aggressive publishing houses interested in this market. This means that university press directors will be compelled to develop and utilize sophisticated marketing strategies if they plan to remain active and successful in this potentially lucrative but hotly contested market. 相似文献
16.
科技期刊开拓数字出版市场的基本策略与原则 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
在新的形势下,科技期刊开拓数字出版市场势在必行。在这个过程中,期刊社应该有明确的角色定位,以维护期刊的数字版权为底线,通过参与构建公正、合理的市场分配机制以最大限度地维护自身的权益。对内要注意加强与同类期刊的合作,对外要理性应对数字出版商之间的竞争,并始终坚持以内容作为自身的核心竞争力。 相似文献
17.
以互联网技术与数字技术为代表的高新技术的快速发展,给传统出版业带来了无限发展空间,同时也带来了最严峻的挑战.拥有多重优势的国际出版商,以及国内一批拥有技术优势的IT企业、通信企业和技术开发商抢占了先机.这给传统出版社带来巨大考验,虽然国内许多大出版集团或出版社已逐步介入数字出版领域,但很少能形成自己的赢利模式.本文立足于现实,分析了国内广大中小型出版社在数字出版进程中面临的困难,并提供了相应的对策. 相似文献
18.
中小出版社当下面临着诸多相同的困境,本文从战略入手,试图为中小出版社摆脱困境寻找一条可行之路。中小出版社的战略构架主要包括产品战略、渠道战略、品牌战略、人才战略、激励战略五个方面。这五个方面环环相扣,是出版社展开战略思考并做大做强时必须考虑和面对的。 相似文献
19.
Toby Green 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(1):13-25
Progress to open access (OA) has stalled, with perhaps 20% of new papers ‘born‐free’, and half of all versions of record pay‐walled; why? In this paper, I review the last 12 months: librarians showing muscle in negotiations, publishers’ Read and Publish deals, and funders determined to force change with initiatives like Plan S. I conclude that these efforts will not work. For example, flipping to supply‐side business models, such as article processing charges, simply flips the pay‐wall to a ‘play‐wall’ to the disadvantage of authors without financial support. I argue that the focus on OA makes us miss the bigger problem: today’s scholarly communications is unaffordable with today’s budgets. OA is not the problem, the publishing process is the problem. To solve it, I propose using the principles of digital transformation to reinvent publishing as a two‐step process where articles are published first as preprints, and then, journal editors invite authors to submit only papers that ‘succeed’ to peer review. This would reduce costs significantly, opening a sustainable pathway for scholarly publishing and OA. The catalyst for this change is for the reputation economy to accept preprints as it does articles in minor journals today. 相似文献
20.
Xiang REN 《Learned Publishing》2013,26(3):197-205
A growing number of online journals and academic platforms are adopting light peer review or ‘publish then filter’ models of scholarly communication. These approaches have the advantage of enabling instant exchanges of knowledge between academics and are part of a wider search for alternatives to traditional peer review and certification processes in scholarly publishing. However, establishing credibility and identifying the correct balance between communication and scholarly rigour remains an important challenge for digital communication platforms targeting academic communities. This paper looks at a highly influential, government‐backed, open publishing platform in China: Science Paper Online, which is using transparent post‐publication peer‐review processes to encourage innovation and address systemic problems in China's traditional academic publishing system. There can be little doubt that the Chinese academic publishing landscape differs in important ways from counterparts in the United States and Western Europe. However, this article suggests that developments in China also provide important lessons about the potential of digital technology and government policy to facilitate a large‐scale shift towards more open and networked models of scholarly communication. 相似文献