Learn how two early career publishers are tackling the thorny issue of pay equity and inclusion in today's interview with Rebecca Bostock (Ohio State UP) and Dominique J Moore (University of Illinois Press).

There are quite a few ways to shift bad behaviors and habits of reviewers to become not just good, but great peer reviewers.

At a recent meeting, a debate was held on the motion: Preprints are going to replace journals. The author was asked to oppose the motion and this post is based on their arguments.

Why did a certain band eliminate brown M&M's from their dressing room? And what does that have to do with the formatting requirements at some journals? This article explains.

Meredith Adinolfi (Cell Press) and Ann Michael (DeltaThink) discuss some of the more complex aspects of the OA landscape, such as funder mandates, Plan S, and transformative agreements.

Lots of things are wrong with paying for peer review. 

Liz Bal from Jisc discusses the scholarly publishing lessons learned from COVID-19, and how they can be applied to make research communication more efficient and effective.

We should strive for open but also be realistic about the options truly available to researchers and discuss them transparently and honestly, argues Dustin Fife.

A look at a session from last week's CHORUS Forum that discussed new open access business models -- what does it take to make them work?

Like all OA funding models, subscribe-to-open solves some problems while creating others. Some of the downsides are pretty fundamental.

Study of researchers indicates that a preprint or accepted manuscript can substitute for the version of record in some use cases but not all.

Scholarly publishers still do not meet researchers' needs. Doing so would require that they rethink existing businesses and organizational models.

How to address lies in our political life? Education, information literacy, gatekeeping, and dialogue aren't enough.