Open community resources are increasingly used to promote open research practices, and are themselves an open practice. They are a powerful way to create shared ownership of a resource and provide agency to add or change them. However, they also present new struggles around embedding them in institutional practice, which we experienced in our own work.

This post expands further on the assertion recently made by Danny Kingsley in her post on “Language co-option in the open space” that “words matter” when trying to have meaningful conversations about open access. Not only do words matter for creating common agreement, but words can also actively create biases, inform decision-making, and even thwart the visions of open publishing and infrastructure advocates most want to champion.

Coming down from the recent FORCE11 Scholarly Communication Institute (FSCI) and FORCE2024 conference at UCLA has allowed reflection on some of the recurring themes from the two events. One of these was the issue of language appropriation in the open scholarship space. In the process of attempting to write some of these issues up, it became clear that this requires something of a wander down history lane.

Academia is undergoing a rapid transformation characterized by exponential growth of scholarly outputs. This phenomenon, often termed the "firehose problem," presents significant challenges for researchers, publishers, funders, policymakers, and institutions alike.

PIDs in scholarly communications and research infrastructure have garnered government attention lately. By aligning with frameworks such as FAIR and POSI and incorporating insights from global initiatives, we present some desirable characteristics of PID infrastructures to guide them.

As we witness the ever-evolving landscape of technology, we realize that artificial intelligence (AI) is not just a buzzword anymore; it's a reality that is already leading to transformation in how scholarly research is published and disseminated.

The New York Times ushered in the New Year with a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. The paper covered the suit, fittingly, as a major business story.

Adopters of the POSI principles have met several times over the last few years to discuss the challenges and the improvements they’ve made in the transparency and longevity of their operations and governance. Hear from those involved in introducing the latest version - v1.1.

By embracing DataCite and Crossref DOIs, the global scholarly community is empowered, reducing financial barriers and fostering broad creation, dissemination, and recognition of research outputs and resources.

Coming from the Global South, I have frequently experienced the cucaracha (cockroach) syndrome, where I feel like what I do is not interesting. This is the phrase that I give to the feeling of my research and perspective being routinely undervalued and underappreciated due to my local context and language abilities.