News organizations should take political reporters – and perhaps even more importantly, political editors – entirely out of the loop on this story. It’s too important to be covered as a two-sided battle over who’s winning the narrative.

Jonathan Tennant's latest book, The [R]evolution of Open Science, is now available online for free.

Women are seriously under-represented in the engineering world - but they can problem-solve from a uniquely impactful perspective.

A certain kind of environmentalist has long hoped that we'll learn to substitute human contact for endless consumption; maybe this is the kind of shock that might open a few eyes.

When Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt asked a large group of underrepresented faculty members why they left their higher education institutions, they told her the real reasons for their departures -- those that climate surveys don't capture.

What if libraries agreed to continue paying the subscription fees to journals that they were already subscribing to, only the journals flipped to open access?

Hilal A. Lashuel's experiences have taught him that maintaining good mental health and balancing life and work is a struggle everywhere in academia.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak exposes an inconvenient truth about science: the current scholarly communication system does not serve the needs of science and society.

We should be nurturing the kinds of publishing cultures we want to see: those that value the labour needed to care for publishing and that work in harmony with research communities rather than extract from them, argues Samuel Moore.

 Science and scientists face crushing opposition. In addition to silent-spreading disease and a burning planet, they must take on the moneyed, the godly, the dictatorial and Mike Pence.

Interview with Nigeria CDC leader Chikwe Ihekweazu on outbreak detection, preparedness, response, and COVID-19 in Africa.

What happened instead of us sitting down and thinking how we could spend our money in the most technologically savvy way to the benefit of science, scholars and society. A generation later, roughly US$300 billion poorer and none the wiser, it seems.

Last year, everyone in U.S. academic publishing had strong opinions about a mythical beast that all had heard about but none had actually seen: a rumored Executive Order from the White House Office of Science and Technology that would mandate immediate public availability of research results by federally-funded authors.

Self-governance of science was supposed to mean freedom of inquiry, but it also ended up serving the business model of scientific publishers while undermining the goals of science policy.

The racist assumption that women of color are hired as faculty because of our identities rather than our credentials can have a serious impact on our careers.

Preprint servers and journals are working overtime to keep up with a "firehose" of data.

More funders and publishers must support such work and emphasize its value to the research community.

This article argues it is irresponsible to support research but not data stewardship.

The author argues that for the humanities to successfully adopt digital technologies, they need to develop an independent open humanities discourse.

The vast majority of the discourse among the punditry and policymakers is about ensuring we have the right response. Shouldn't we instead be asking a more fundamental question: How did this happen in the first place?

The virus doesn’t follow the news and doesn’t care about Twitter. This article proposes that reporting should distinguish between at least three levels of information reliability.

Opinion piece argues that Plan S deals have streamlined open access provision in the global North while exacerbating existing inequalities in scholarly publishing, by establishing and entrenching a two-tier system of scholarly publishing based on access to funds. 

John Malloy shares his experiences of risking debt to travel - and discusses what to do about it.

Up-to-the-minute reports and statistics can unintentionally distort the facts.

Rows over eugenics reveal how difficult it is to 'decouple' controversial concepts in our heads.

DNA testing companies are starting to profit from selling our data on to big pharma. Perhaps they should be paying us, says science writer Laura Spinney.

Science was a place I ultimately left, not so much because I wanted to, but because I had to.

UKRI and other funders must prevent good intentions on open access from undermining good science, says Lee Cronin.

Standard reports paint a much rosier picture of the research landscape than may be warranted. In this analysis, the first hypothesis of standard articles reported was supported by the data 96% of the time, while that rate was only 44% in registered reports.

A survey of New Zealand scientists found that recipients of a randomized funding program favored random allocations of some kinds of grant money.