A number of writers have discussed the potential of advanced media technologies to support a more inclusive, democratic society that prioritizes values such as community and the social good. Enzensberger points out that we cannot assume that the potential of the technology will simply unfold on its own in a capitalist society. This discussion paper is designed to invite participation to share experiences of recent muzzling of Canadian government scientists, librarians and archivists and advocacy strategeis for communication rights to support democracy in Canada.
Through much of the 1980s, governments and corporations invested hundreds of millions of hours and dollars developing three technologies now generally considered extinct: teletex, videotext and Minitel. The technologies which now define the history of the Internet were relatively ignored, though known to exist as obscure academic experiments. Most curiously, BBSes and Fidonet – popular technologies which defined the digital world for millions –were, and remain, largely ignored by scholars. This paper quantitatively explores the scholarly output regarding four ICT paradigms extant in the 1980s, reports on their current state of development, and theoretically interrogates the institutional lessons to be learned from three failed research projects.
The enduring policy conflicts of the Information Age increasingly demand a history of technology that acknowledges the legacy of accumulated user experience across successive paradigms and generations of communication media. Interrogation of the histories of Internet, teletext, videotex and bulletin board system (BBS) technologies, reveal the 1980s as a watershed decade for the radically decentralized socialization of digital communication. While each new technical paradigm requires cultural practices to socialize the products of engineering, the prevalence of elite- and infrastructure-focused histories reflect a systematic preference for describing centralized processes of engineering. This work integrates disparate accounts of technological innovation, diffusion, adoption and translation, pointing the way toward a more flexible, user-focused, people’s history of the Internet.
The collective budgets of the world’s academic libraries are the primary economic support for scholarly journal publishing today, accounting for 80-90% of publisher revenue. This poster argues that shifting this support from subscriptions to open access publishing will be critical to a successful transition to a fully open access scholarly journal publishing system. Drawing on economic analysis conducted as part of my dissertation, this poster also argues that scholarly publishing can be not only fully open access, but also considerably more affordable, with prudent attention to necessary efficiencies in the transition process. The range of possibilities for a fully open access publishing system include options that could cost less – possibly considerably less - than half of current spend. A key metric to assessing efficiency will be the average cost per article; when this amount is multiplied by the over one million scholarly articles produced around the world on an annual basis, it is easy to see what a difference it makes whether the average is the PLoS ONE article processing fee of id="mce_marker",350 US, the average cost per article of scholar-led publishers as found by Edgar & Willinsky of id="mce_marker"88, PeerJ’s lifetime publishing starting at $99 – or the $3,000 to $5,000 per article charged by a few publishers today. It is argued that efficiencies are necessary as libraries need to re-fund social sciences and humanities and scholarly monograph publishing and clear funds for new tasks such as institutional repositories, collecting and curating local research works, increasingly including research data.
Full data for The Dramatic Growth of Open Access, Dec. 31, 2012.
Full data for the Dramatic Growth of Open Access.
Full data for Dramatic Growth of Open Access series, to September 30, 2012.
Datasets to accompany The Dramatic growth of Open Access June 30, 2012 issue.
This is a data file with manipulable calculations of cost savings for University of Iowa Libraries with different scenarios for a flip from subscriptions to open access.