Author Archives: Stephen

Harvard: we have a problem

Posted on 23 April 2012 by Stephen

This is astonishing. Harvard is one of the best and one of the wealthiest universities in the world but last week its Faculty Advisory Council* announced that it can no longer afford to maintain its subscriptions to academic journals. The announcement … Continue reading →

Posted in Harvard, journal subscriptions, Open Access, science, Scientific Life | Comments Off on Harvard: we have a problem

Eyes on the prize are blind to reality

Posted on 22 April 2012 by Stephen

Scientists’ quest for publication in journals with high impact factors is widely perceived as one of the more refractory barriers to the fuller adoption of open access, which I believe to be in the best interests of science. But the … Continue reading →

Posted in Impact Factors, nature, Open Access, Prizes, Scientific Life, Vanity | Comments Off on Eyes on the prize are blind to reality

What’s your favourite colour?

Posted on 14 April 2012 by Stephen

What’s your favourite colour? Anyone who has socialised with small children will have been confronted with this serious-faced interrogation at some point. It’s the sort of question that erupts as soon as young kids learn to verbalise the jumble of … Continue reading →

Posted in Colour, Protein Crystallography, science, X-ray crystallography, X-rays | Comments Off on What’s your favourite colour?

Hawking with Dinosaurs

Posted on 3 April 2012 by Stephen

Here is a ‘paper‘ that I think would not be accepted by PLoS ONE and yet it was the subject of a report on the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 this morning, arguably the nation’s premier morning news show. … Continue reading →

Posted in BBC Radio 4, Science & Media, Today Programme, Tom Feilden | Comments Off on Hawking with Dinosaurs

PLoS ONE: from the Public Library of Sloppiness?

Posted on 1 April 2012 by Stephen

I had an argument with my colleague in the tea-room the other day. Gratifyingly, I learned he had been reading my blogposts on the subject of open access, but it soon became clear he did not entirely share my enthusiasm … Continue reading →

Posted in Academic publishing, Arguments, Open Access, PLoS, science, Scientific Life | Comments Off on PLoS ONE: from the Public Library of Sloppiness?

Fabulous night

Posted on 27 March 2012 by Stephen

Tonight, at the end of an exhausting day, I have few words, but it was beautifully clear so I have taken some pictures of the night sky. And made a short film. The photographs are by no means exemplary. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Astronomy, Jupiter, Moon, Venus | Comments Off on Fabulous night

Elsevier, the Research Works Act and Open Access: where to now?

Posted on 18 March 2012 by Stephen

If Elsevier calculated that its withdrawal of support for the Research Works Act (RWA) would neutralise the arguments stirred up around academic publishing, I think the company is mistaken. I certainly hope so. Things may have gone a little quiet … Continue reading →

Posted in elsevier, Open Access, publishing, Research Works Act, Scientific Life | Comments Off on Elsevier, the Research Works Act and Open Access: where to now?

Libel Reform: the endgame?

Posted on 15 March 2012 by Stephen

It has been a long and winding road but tonight the journey towards libel reform in England and Wales paused in the historic Great Hall of the Inner Temple to take stock. The wheels are turning and the machine of government … Continue reading →

Posted in Libel Reform | Comments Off on Libel Reform: the endgame?

The road well trodden

Posted on 14 March 2012 by Stephen

Scientists should do this. Journalists should do that. And eventually we will live in a world where the media reporting of science achieves perfection. At least that is the hypothesis.

Posted in debate, journalism, Royal Institution, science, Science & Media | Comments Off on The road well trodden

Science: the bargain for funding

Posted on 27 February 2012 by Stephen

On the Guardian web-site today you will find a piece by myself and Imran Khan of CaSE which is a response to an attack on scientists for striking a faustian bargain with business.   The attack was written by Ananyo … Continue reading →

Posted in ananyo bhattacharya, Guardian, imran khan, science, Science & Politics, Science Funding | Comments Off on Science: the bargain for funding