Site Presented By
Saturday, Nov 7, 2009
It may be true that scientific publishers are old, stodgy, and out of touch. However, it is also true that many of them are, in fact, not for profit. They charge as little as they can manage and still get by, and what money they do make is put towards grants, education, and intiatives designed to -- believe it or not -- make as much of their content as they can afford freely available, particularly to those who need it most, such as researchers in developing countries and medical patients.
There is no doubt that the internet is forcing radical changes in how scientific information is distributed. And yes, some journals do have a financial interest in maintaining the status quo. However, many, many others do not; they are simply trying to provide valuable services to the scientific and education communities, and they should not be tarred with the same brush.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox
