Open access and academia.edu
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it. On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex. Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them. And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them. Jonathan PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
Hi Jonathan You probably should stop changing the title of the messages: breaks the thread :-) The garden wall does not seem unscaleable, anyone can create an account on academia... cheers Mathieu ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Jonathan Sterne, Dr. [jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 7:07 To: <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] Open access and academia.edu Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it. On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex. Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them. And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them. Jonathan PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Dear colleagues, I have been following this thread with interest and I would like to thank you all for the discussion. Mathieu, I think the walled garden Jonathan is suggeting goes beyond notions of ease of access. After all, new media devices and social media are usually designed for easy use. However, this ease is tied to obfuscatory operations whereby control, data collection and other procedures are 'hidden' from 'plainview.' I think it is our task to interrogate these obfuscations. Though I use academia.edu, this conversation has pushed me to reconsider how I present my research while contributing to free and open access. Also, thank you for posting the titles of good open access journals. Best, Iván Chaar-López PhD Student Department of American Culture University of Michigan @multitudenred
On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Mathieu ONeil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au> wrote:
Hi Jonathan
You probably should stop changing the title of the messages: breaks the thread :-) The garden wall does not seem unscaleable, anyone can create an account on academia...
cheers Mathieu
________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Jonathan Sterne, Dr. [jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 7:07 To: <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] Open access and academia.edu
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it.
On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex.
Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them.
And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them.
Jonathan
PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi Ivan Thanks for explaining! ;-) Well yes, pretty much everything you do online can be tracked, measured and sold (if that's what you mean by "control"). Nothing mysterious about that. Facebook and academia.edu have the same model (they even look the same): you provide content, we network it. It's a trade-off. If anyone can set up a non-commercial alternative that offers the same functionalities, I'll jump in right away (@Rob: I'm looking at you!). Re. open-access, at the risk of repetition: if you just have volunteers (as most open access journals do) then you will have inconsistent proof-reading and hence mistakes and errors (not all researchers can copy-edit or proofread well, particularly when English is not their first language). Maybe a slip in text quality is the price to pay? So yes, pools of university-run journals could pay proofreaders... in the current climate not sure many will go down that path. cheers Mathieu ________________________________________ From: Iván [ivan.chaar@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:26 To: Mathieu ONeil Cc: Jonathan Sterne, Dr.; <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: Re: [Air-L] Open access and academia.edu Dear colleagues, I have been following this thread with interest and I would like to thank you all for the discussion. Mathieu, I think the walled garden Jonathan is suggeting goes beyond notions of ease of access. After all, new media devices and social media are usually designed for easy use. However, this ease is tied to obfuscatory operations whereby control, data collection and other procedures are 'hidden' from 'plainview.' I think it is our task to interrogate these obfuscations. Though I use academia.edu, this conversation has pushed me to reconsider how I present my research while contributing to free and open access. Also, thank you for posting the titles of good open access journals. Best, Iván Chaar-López PhD Student Department of American Culture University of Michigan @multitudenred
On Dec 9, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Mathieu ONeil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au> wrote:
Hi Jonathan
You probably should stop changing the title of the messages: breaks the thread :-) The garden wall does not seem unscaleable, anyone can create an account on academia...
cheers Mathieu
________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Jonathan Sterne, Dr. [jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 7:07 To: <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] Open access and academia.edu
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it.
On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex.
Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them.
And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them.
Jonathan
PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi Matthieu, I get the digest, so the subject is always already changed. Sorry to inconvenience you with my replies. Everyone else: Deborah's point about academia.edu's business model, is completely fair. Except I think we've seen enough commercial social media ventures at the point that the burden of proof is on them regarding the selling of users' data. So the idea that "anyone can sign up" is only valid if you think the TOS are okay. Most of my friends seem to. I don't. Social media companies are profit making ventures, and like the big commercial presses, I see no reason to assume their motivations are mine (as a scholar). I would be thrilled to be proven wrong and will immediately retract the mean things I said about academia.edu if they have another business model that doesn't involve selling users' data (or knowledge generated from it) or intend to become a nonprofit like Wikipedia. In fact, I would praise them. In the meantime, just remember that ventures like academia.edu are expensive to run. At least the media scholars among us should be asking who is paying and what they are hoping for in return. I'm about to disappear for a bit, so my apologies in advance for fanning flames and then ducking out. But my points are serious. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.
On Dec 9, 2013, at 15:46, "Mathieu ONeil" <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au> wrote:
Hi Jonathan
You probably should stop changing the title of the messages: breaks the thread :-) The garden wall does not seem unscaleable, anyone can create an account on academia...
cheers Mathieu
________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Jonathan Sterne, Dr. [jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 7:07 To: <air-l@listserv.aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] Open access and academia.edu
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it.
On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex.
Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them.
And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them.
Jonathan
PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" <air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Interesting discussion. As a keen user of Academia.edu and a less keen user of ResearchGate (which I find has far fewer HASS academics interacting on it compared to Academia), I was wondering: 1. How does Academia.edu profit from its users, as some commentators here are claimed? 2. Is Elsevier making the same demands of ResearchGate? Cheers Deborah Senior Principal Research Fellow (Professor) Department of Sociology and Social Policy University of Sydney C On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Jonathan Sterne, Dr. < jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it.
On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex.
Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them.
And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them.
Jonathan
PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" < air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote:
iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Hi, Deborah - It isn't certain Academia will ever turn a profit (as even much larger social media sites may not). But for now it has attracted venture capital, and it is very much in the game of turning user activity into big data that someone may want to buy: http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/17/academia-edu/ One thing Academia does not have to do is produce content, nor make connections between us. We willingly do that for them. They provide a platform, we provide the data, and they provide themselves (possibly) with an IPO. Regards, Rob Gehl --- Assistant Professor, Communication University of Utah www.robertwgehl.org | @robertwgehl Watch for my book, Reverse Engineering Social Media, from Temple in 2014 On 12/09/2013 02:24 PM, Deborah Lupton wrote:
Interesting discussion. As a keen user of Academia.edu and a less keen user of ResearchGate (which I find has far fewer HASS academics interacting on it compared to Academia), I was wondering:
1. How does Academia.edu profit from its users, as some commentators here are claimed? 2. Is Elsevier making the same demands of ResearchGate?
Cheers
Deborah
Senior Principal Research Fellow (Professor) Department of Sociology and Social Policy University of Sydney
C
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Jonathan Sterne, Dr. < jonathan.sterne@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Just to be clear for Matthieu, my point wasn't about services and whether people like academia.edu or not. Many of my colleagues love it. My concern is profit models and ethical and social obligations, especially differences between theirs and mine. The walled garden is reason enough for me not to opt in. I have managed to continue discovering good new work without it.
On the services front, just a big +1 to the points from Daren and Rex.
Also: if you want open access journals to have higher impact factors, don't just submit to them, read the and cite them.
And one more thing: those of us who write tenure reviews also need to take time in our letters to argue for the significance of new publishing models when junior scholars take advantage of them.
Jonathan
PS -- Still, I also believe there is a place for university and independent presses: they do a lot of useful work for authors and for readers. Even the most committed digital humanists are still writing books, as are many social scientists who want to reach wider audiences. And funding for good open access journals remains an issue. -- http://sterneworks.org (apologies for iPad typos.)
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:38, Matthieu "air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org" < air-l-request@listserv.aoir.org> wrote: iefly: not sure about comparing the enormous fees charged by Elsevier etc to a free service like Academia. Now, granted that Academia.edu may be profiting off users, but - apart from its social networking functions - it does provide services since it tells you (amongst other things) (1) when people search for your work, what search terms they use, where they come from; (2) how many times subscribers have downloaded specific items; (3) when people upload content that you are interested in. If it did not do those things people would not use it
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
participants (5)
-
Deborah Lupton -
Iván -
Jonathan Sterne, Dr. -
Mathieu ONeil -
Robert W. Gehl