Singleton A. Editorial. Scholarly communication - can we have our name back? Learned Publishing 2011;24(1):3-4
(doi: 10.1087/20110101)
It discusses the appropriateness of the use of the term "scholarly communication" to which over the last years it has been giving a meaning that is not the proper one. The properly defined term is much wider than the modern quasi-definition implies. As a misnomer, it is used, for example, to talk about how libraries can persuade authors to retain copyright in any of their works or to deposit them in institutional repositories. "Communication" involves "imparting or exchanging information" and where is any aspect of it in retaining copyright or putting in a repository? Publishers themselves are usually involved in only a part of the formal communication system and sometimes "communication" is not the most important part of what they do.
(doi: 10.1087/20110101)
It discusses the appropriateness of the use of the term "scholarly communication" to which over the last years it has been giving a meaning that is not the proper one. The properly defined term is much wider than the modern quasi-definition implies. As a misnomer, it is used, for example, to talk about how libraries can persuade authors to retain copyright in any of their works or to deposit them in institutional repositories. "Communication" involves "imparting or exchanging information" and where is any aspect of it in retaining copyright or putting in a repository? Publishers themselves are usually involved in only a part of the formal communication system and sometimes "communication" is not the most important part of what they do.
Comments