from event on 27 June 2013.
Tweets collected with Martin Hawksey’s TAGS v.5, searching for hashtag #OLHtalk. Edited to remove retweets, obvious duplicates, and non-event-related tweets; see also complete spreadsheet. (note, this does not necessarily collect every tweet sent with the hashtag, just those found by the Twitter Search API).
Apologies, this page is slow to load because of Twitter’s complex styles/scripts on embedded tweets.
Open Library of Humanities talk at Harvard
Follow "Open Access and the Humanities", 2-4 pm EST today, on hashtag #OLHtalk @openlibhums @berkmancenter @MHCHarvard @Harvard_History #OA
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
I'm attending, & maybe tweeting. RT @jeroenson: 1 hour till "#OpenAccess and the #Humanities" http://t.co/qq5uoDewuL follow online #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
. @DavidRArmitage, @martin_eve, and @the_blochian enjoy macaroons before Open Access and the Humanities. #OLHtalk pic.twitter.com/3kAM6CNyzj
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
#OLHtalk starting. David Armitage introducing Martin Paul Eve and Caroline Edwards of Open Lib of Humanities.
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
The digital space is not very hospitable to the scholarly monograph. –@iceskatingbears #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Open Access refers to the removal of price and admission barriers to academic research and dissemination. – @martin_eve #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Edwards defining #openaccess : moving price and permissions barriers to access of peer-reviewed research. "Non-rivalrous" #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Open access is not the same thing as universal access. –@martin_eve #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Attending Open Access and the Humanities lecture with @openlibhums, follow live tweets at #olhtalk
— DARTH Crimson (@DarthHarvard) June 27, 2013
Open access isn't just important for people, but for machines as well. –@martin_eve #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Open access is not just for human consumption: also for machine processing and searching of research publications. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Looks like team @openlibhums are ready to go https://t.co/qAgN7mecgM !! #OLHtalk
— Graham Steel (@McDawg) June 27, 2013
Open access makes institutional affiliation less important. –@the_blochian #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Journal subscription rates have increased much faster than inflation, leading to an access gap. –@the_blochian #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Overview of the serials crisis: research library journal spending has risen to 300% above UK inflation rate. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
The Prestige Trap: Academics confer prestige on journals that lock them into the system; but could this change? –@the_blochian #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
if academics create the prestige, couldn't they rethink the system of publishing — @the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
traditional cost of paper, postage meant that only a small number of articles could be published — @the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
.@openlibhums started as response to the "prestige trap"- scholars create prestige through jrnl review process; page-limited jrnls #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
There is an artificial scarcity created by top journals; open access digital projects are challenging this. –@the_blochian #olhtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
“digital space not hospitable to the scholarly monograph” –@iceskatingbears < or, monograph model not suited to digital environ? #olhtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
#openaccess separates the distinction process from the publishing process. How should peer review in humanities then work? #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
is blind peer review actually that anonymous? students get face-to-face feedback, why not scholars? — @the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
Is blind peer review the only way to determine quality? Could it be public? Could it occur after publication? –@the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
might peers be not only academics but also independent reviewers? — @kfitzpat cited by @the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
scholars haven't been paid by publishers since c17 — @the_blochian so how can Open Access be made affordable? #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
Open access funding models: not just APCs! #olhtalk pic.twitter.com/dG43ql3mGw
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
Do we publish to gain money? Do articles make money aside from adding more value/worth to the person publishing? #olhtalk
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
Both #journal AND #monograph #publishing in crisis. So why is #openaccess discussion in US (v UK) focused on journals? #olhtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
How can OA journals be affordable? 1. Volunteer labor/small scale journals 2. Pay to print 3. Advertising –@the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
free labor, free submission: Orbin, Alluvium, Foucault Studies; Advertising revenue free submission; — @the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
OLH already putting pressure on other OA publishers–e.g. Sage Open, now $99 APC #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Institutional subsidy, free submission [LPS] (this the favored solution for Open Access humanities publishing) — @the_blochian #olhtalk
— Roads to Power (@roadstopower) June 27, 2013
OLF favours institutional subsidy, free submission, no APCs–cost transferred back to libraries; inverted subscription model #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
I greatly admire how @openlibhums grok https://t.co/EzNdtJh4et the @PLOS model http://t.co/oiNY4IGK3x #HSS #OLHtalk
— Graham Steel (@McDawg) June 27, 2013
International challenges, asymmetrical budgets–what of access for Global South, filling of global "access gaps" (@petersuber)? #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
International challenges to open access: There are vast differences in research budgets across the world-@the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Barriers remain: filtering, censorship, language (non-English), digital divide NB @Unesco Global Open Access Project (GOAP) #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
"p2p review" #olhtalk
— akb (@alexiskbee) June 27, 2013
Also, Hadithi (now joined with @DPLA), ADLSN, ICADLA in Africa #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
UNESCO's Global Open Access Project has 2 priorities: disseminating rsrch on Africa & on gender equality. Funders: US, some of EU #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
To obtain universal access for research requires overcoming linguistic, technological and political barriers –@the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
OLH to connect existing networks as well as create new platform–articulating with e.g. OA libraries in Latin America #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Copyright confers right to hoard #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Free as in speech, not as in beer #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Open access research can draw lessons from Richard Stallman's Free Software ethical framework. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
@the_blochian: "#OpenAccess is *not* #UniversalAccess." Yes! #OA is a start, but far more needed/possible for future of knowledge #olhtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
Crediting people for their work is what scholars do every day; Creative Commons attribution functions in similar ways –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Accreditation, attribution all familiar to humanists–we call it citation: easily transferable to creative commons licences #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Reassessing the meaning of copyrights and the ethics of ownership and citation — a new philosophy of creativity and access? #OLHtalk
— Christopher Morse (@MrChr1stoph3r) June 27, 2013
Can humanities scholarship embrace remix culture? –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Objections to CC licences: a) commercial re-use prevents close engagement; b) plagiarism will increase; c) derivatives–beneficial? #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Text-mining as an important aspect of why to use open access licenses which allow derivative works. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Emerging digital methodologies might require open access to thrive. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
The scholarly monograph & open access: editorial input is an important part of development done by the press. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
“scholars not paid by pubs since c17 —@the_blochian”: not true, many in HSS are or wish to be paid, e.g. books. STEM: licensing #OLHtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
What of OA and the monograph? Editorial input crucial, but cross-cut by commodity fetishism #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Editorial process of a book is much different than an article. #olhtalk /I know you heard me on the radio (true)
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
(1/2) Resources required to not only access knowledge but to produce & distribute it are concentrated in the North. #olhtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
How are monographs different than an assemblage of papers? 1) Quality of editorial input 2) Quality of production –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Economic pressure is making it more difficult for first-time authors to get their scholarly monograph published. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
The digital makes the labour put into publications transparent; labour does not melt into air #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
HELL YES http://t.co/TE4abUFANh RT @zacharysdavis Can humanities scholarship embrace remix culture? –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Graham Steel (@McDawg) June 27, 2013
(2/2) How might #OA pressure that intensifying global divide? How might it even inadvertently support it if uncareful? #olhtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
Does making a monograph open access negatively impact print sales? No. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
The Radiohead Model: indications are that OA doesn't impact monograph sales #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Knowledge Unlatched is a model of opening access to monographs by clubbing libraries together. Like @unglueit for scholarly works #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Proposal: A consortium of university libraries around the world to fund open access. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
“indications are that OA doesn’t impact monograph sales”: who has good data/args on that? @oapenuk study under way, what else? #OLHtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
How much does it cost to produce a scholarly monograph? #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Publishers now converging on $20-30,000 for OA monograph charges; OLH model to be based on library subscriptions #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
.@openlibhums is embarking on a pilot project w/ uni presses to document the costs involved in scholarly monograph production. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
May all your problems be technical cuz u can fix those. #olhtalk
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
International steering committee of @openlibhums : high-profile scholars including @DavidRArmitage . #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
We've asked academics to pledge to write one article within the first year of @openlibhums. –@the_blochian #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Major media coverage of @openlibhums indicated interest from scholars in open access models. "Pledge to publish" by scholars #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
.@openlibhums is striving to develop a prestigious reputation, partly by building a network of distinguished editors. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
.@openlibhums is soliciting articles from established scholars to ensure that it's a high-quality, prestigious publishing endeavor. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
We're interested in flexible, cross-disciplinary publication. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Innovation, particularly in academia, needs to be phased with delicacy. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Typesetting is one of the hardest, and most costly, tasks in publication. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
Section on social problems & solutions done. Now, on to the technological aspects of this system. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
How you can help and get involved with @openlibhums https://t.co/JBwWyEx5ru #OLHtalk #openaccess
— Graham Steel (@McDawg) June 27, 2013
For typesetting: they're building an open workflow: .odt to TEI to NLM XML. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Universities = genealogies of validation: who said whom was good #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Universities as "genealogies of validation"- how to make technical substitutes for the journal-branding prestige mechanism? #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
.@openlibhums strategy now is to embrace academic prestige economy, focus on participation by well-known academics. #OLHtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
Editorship is really just curation: what if that process was more explicit in academia? –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
What about private, shared journals constructed for a particular course or research project? –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
How to confer prestige through technology–e.g. buckets (PLOS model) and fronts (curated selection of articles from bucket)? #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Overlay journals: a curation mechanism for articles that are already open-access. Could be useful for course readers, topical lists #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Digital preservation–LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, off-site backup, BitTorrent #OLHtalk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
Digital preservation: Dark archives such as LOCKSS and CLOCKSS can help ensure no digital scholarship is lost. –@martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
@zacharysdavis making curation more explicit would also make it easier to explain to grad students how scholarly publishing works. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
#olhtalk Digital preservation of scholarly literature involving BitTorrent — excellent! Advertised to scholars how/where?
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
Open Access for the Humanities Vine #OLHtalk https://t.co/uZuuBjKP9a
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
#olhtalk Other obvious venue for digital preservation of scholarly content: @internetarchive
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
Now going to q&a at #OLHtalk : left to right, @davidrarmitage @the_blochian @martin_eve http://t.co/3R2NwQZVk4
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
Yes, @martin_eve! Creatively address'g #digitalpreservation is key. Even #PDF is not obsolescence-proof #olhtalk @THATCampCaribe
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
puzzled by idea of taking pre-digital/Web monograph form & practices as given, looking to fund. If failing, new forms needed. #OLHtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
Open access innovators should work together to avoid redundancy and fragmentation. #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
@martin_eve "We may not be saving people's lives in the humanities but we do hope we're enriching them." #OLHtalk #OA #Humanities
— De Gruyter TRS (@degruyter_TRS) June 27, 2013
Enthralled audience at #OLHtalk pic.twitter.com/Cj0n5GFSfk
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
#olhtalk Re we are not saving people's lives in the humanities: I wouldn't be so sure. #war
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
Academia needs its own version of Github. But a LOT more user friendly. #OLHtalk
— Zachary Davis (@zacharysdavis) June 27, 2013
@degruyter_TRS @martin_eve At its best, the #humanities help us understand how we live & imagine another world. Vital. #olhtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
#OLHtalk what would a GitHub for Humanists look like?
— deb sarlin (@DebSarlin) June 27, 2013
#olhtalk Q: How do you address royalties wrt open access for monographs? One A: OA works in commercial publishing too. See @neilhimself.
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
"@southendpress @martin_eve At its best the #humanities help us understand how we live & imagine another world. Vital. #olhtalk" Absolutely!
— De Gruyter TRS (@degruyter_TRS) June 27, 2013
#olhtalk Of course, reputation comes into play heavily when thinking about royalties from sales and OA.
— Vika Zafrin (@veek) June 27, 2013
John Harvard smiles upon the open-access movement #OLHtalk pic.twitter.com/22wyvIdblX
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013
"Every [published] scholarly book consists of a number of books that didn't make the cut." Making those costs visible. @martin_eve #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
The clinical skills when tempered with humanities make a surgeon a gr8 soul 4 nobility n profession n humanity n outlook. – osler #olhtalk
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
OA – Not as the collapse of the university press, but a process of making the labor of book production evident #OLHtalk
— deb sarlin (@DebSarlin) June 27, 2013
@martin_eve: "prestige factor (v $) as academic capital."/Yep. Getting the work into world has value too. More, really. #OLHtalk
— South End Press (@southendpress) June 27, 2013
Interesting ? about blogging relative to publication; blogging as a non-peer-reviewed form for popular dissemination of rsrch #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
“@openlibhums favours institutional subsidy—inverted subscription model”: could try just making existing journal subs voluntary. #OLHtalk
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
@cliotropic but doesn't blogging have peer review in the comment section? I think of psychology today's incidents. #olhtalk.
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
new model for books-discovery today that many of us still want the object, will buy it before expecting to locate/access it online #OLHtalk
— deb sarlin (@DebSarlin) June 27, 2013
@SeerGenius it's a form of peer review, but not the same as the traditional process with revisions afterward. #OLHtalk
— Shane Landrum (@cliotropic) June 27, 2013
That would appear to be a wrap at #OLHtalk I did my best virtually with https://t.co/iNrdXYxnj7
— Graham Steel (@McDawg) June 27, 2013
@cliotropic might not be traditional but it has managed to call some folks out on their pseudoscience. #olhtalk
— Myrna E. Morales (@SeerGenius) June 27, 2013
@mcdawg Thank you for tracking the #OLHtalk on storify! http://t.co/XvoLGHc3ii This is great for anyone who missed the event!
— Mahindra Humanities (@MHCHarvard) June 27, 2013
.#OLHtalk event storify by @McDawg missing many of the tweets, does anyone want to make a complete one? @MHCHarvard @DavidRArmitage
— Tim McCormick (@tmccormick) June 27, 2013
Thank you so much to everyone who attended & discussed the #OLHTalk. We had a great time & just made our NY train. Keep in touch!
— Caroline Edwards (@the_blochian) June 27, 2013
Great day speaking at Harvard w @the_blochian. Huge thanks to @DavidRArmitage & @iceskatingbears. Deeply honored in such company #OLHtalk
— Dr Martin Paul Eve (@martin_eve) June 27, 2013
Huge thanks to @martin_eve and @the_blochian for superb #OLHtalk, lively questions, and all your work on @openlibhums. Godspeed to Blighty!
— David Armitage (@DavidRArmitage) June 27, 2013