Commuters like myself are probably a representative sample; totally bored with broadcast radio, I go to the trouble of downloading podcasts, Digital Campus included, and burning them to CD because my car only has a CD player. After all, I only have so much time to read, i.e. never enough, and podcasts like this are a great way to make time work for me.
But that’s just the technology. Regarding demographics: my commute is to and from Jerusalem, Israel.
]]>-Tom
]]>Open access does not mean lawyers who only publish to their blogs. It doesn’t mean that things must be available online now instead of being available in 6 months. It does not mean articles that are not peer-reviewed. It does not mean works that are not properly copy-edited, or blog postings, or any of that. It does not even mean not publishing through the big publishers (although practically it often does). It doesn’t even mean just putting an article on your website. Like the free software movement, or the free culture movement, it is primarily about freedom, from which the other benefits flow.
Rather than discuss how historians just aren’t as up-to-date, it would have been nice to discuss the economic pressures which have partially driven open access in the sciences, and which may be less in the humanities, or the practical aspects which make open access to articles easier than to monographs. You did touch upon the idea that employees of public universities might have an obligation to provide their work to as wide an audience as possible, which was great. But otherwise, the discussion was a bit mixed up.
]]>