If peer-review is a fundamental aspect of how science is done then we in academia are required to act as reviewers as part of our jobs. I assume there is no real argument as to if peer-review is needed. Instead one can argue ...
The information racketeers are trying to increase their monopoly. It is just a proposed merger at the moment. Those in the UK(?) & Germany(?) can contact their relevant competition & anti-trust commissions to oppose this move #SpringerNPGmerger
OpenCon 2014 is the student and early career researcher conference on Open Access, Open Education, and Open Data and will be held on November 15-17, 2014 in Washington, DC. It is organized by the Right to Research Coalition, SPARC (The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition), ...
Stuart Lawson has sent FOI requests to all UK universities not in the Russell group and has found out what they paid to Wiley, Springer, Taylor and Francis, Sage, OUP and CUP in the years 2010-2014. (Apparently information about Elsevier will be added later.) I haven't perused the data yet, so I don't know what it reveals. For now I'm just happy that it's out there in the public domain.
Don't call it the ball thing. Call it 'Pure Being'
I'm a BBSRC-funded researcher at the University of Bath working on extracting phylogeny from the literature using content mining. I started out as a Biology undergrad student at Imperial College, progressed to a Masters degree at the Natural History Museum, London, and submitted my PhD thesis on fossils and phylogeny at the University of Bath in 2013.
As a direct consequence of my research I have become involved with the Open Knowledge Foundation, particularly the Open Science Working Group as I think there is much room for improvement in the way that science is currently done - particularly with regard to providing Open Data & Code in re-usable and frictionless ways.