<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>bbgm - the discussion - Latest Comments in When a publisher loses perspective</title><link>http://mndoci.disqus.com/</link><description>At the interface of science and computing</description><atom:link href="https://mndoci.disqus.com/when_a_publisher_loses_perspective/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:58:58 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: When a publisher loses perspective</title><link>http://mndoci.com/blog/2007/04/26/when-a-publisher-loses-perspective/#comment-1297148</link><description>&lt;p&gt;on this issue, my perspective (&lt;a href="http://www.nonoscience.info/2007/04/27/closed-science/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.nonoscience.info/2007/04/27/closed-science/"&gt;shameless plug &lt;/a&gt; from my blog) about the uncertain role of science blogging&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"In the context of online dissemination of “hot” research either the publishers worry that the number of “free” online viewers of such blogs/websites are inordinately more because of which they (publishers) are loosing potential revenue from some of those free viewers - they could have been forced to buy the journal if not for my blog/website - or they are still confused about the free online advertisement they are getting for their journals and research published therein by these online discussions."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Only when scientists directly publish their research results in their webpages and/or their parent organization's endorsed pages (or "free journals") such "locking up" of research by middlemen (publishers, who invest a lot of money and in turn want profit) will stop.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Arunn</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:58:58 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>