It's more the "if you don't like guns, don't hire people because they have 357 Magnums!" argument

hahaha

Yep - it’s interesting what pathologies it exposes: Nature paper obsession, h index judgment of a young researcher in a field with lower citations, etc

Meanwhile it’s hard to believe that in 2025 some people think community engagement and writing about research culture should be discouraged.

One can argue that there are good reasons to publish articles on social issues in a widely read popular magazine that do not apply to research papers aimed at a niche audience (never really bought the notion all CNS papers are of broad interest).

Maybe journals aren’t the root cause of problems in academia just a symptom…

John Gurdon (1933-2025) John Gurdon was a towering figure in developmental biology, respected and admired throughout the world. His discovery, made when he was a PhD student, that the nuclei of differentiated cells retain th...

"Gurdon..claimed not to like reading at all – not even the scientific literature...He suggested it was his inability to understand anything complicated that led to the clarity of thought for which he was renowned" And of course a Nobel Prize.. journals.biologists.com/dev/article/...

Congratulations and good luck with the new gig!

Zoom version of Yalta 😆

Materials assembled for virtual summit with @pracheeac.bsky.social

I’m fine. All my assets are in waterfront properties 😆

Just remember where your pensions funds are invested 😉

😆

I think the loss in value is partly fears AI will change the business

The trend goes back to the late 60s really

Springer Nature: 2025 in review Part 2 of a series of newsletters exploring 2025 annual reports

“The academic community is obsessed with publishing companies’ profitability…worth noting that the owners of Springer Nature saw the value of their investment almost halve between 2024 and 2026” newsletter.journalology.com/p/springer-n...

Making a splash: demand for raw and ‘brewed’ milk growing in UK Farmers and delivery firms launch new options for those seeking alternative to traditionally pasteurised product

The ideologization of the ‘natural’ - from raw milk to home birth to vaccine rejection and fantasies about a rural life that is as artificial as cities - is one of the most depressing trends of the past few decades and literally the opposite of progress www.theguardian.com/food/2026/ap...

I have written elsewhere that academics demanding pay and credit for public engagement is a neoliberal trap. People need jobs, healthcare, housing, and education. This includes artists and writers of all kinds. Employed academics don't need micropayments and merit points for doing public engagement.

Irish skin is basically not fit for purpose. I speak as someone covered in it.

So by this logic the conversation about whether one should pay peer reviewers goes away if their reviews are made public?

Rings a bell 👀

Sure - my intention in the original skeet was just to say I can assert the quote is a true statement without inviting a debate about the CRUK policy. Then that became a more general discussion about the wisdom of highlighting quotes that may or may not represent an article's broader point

I guess - but there are sentences in articles that resonate one but need make clear that's not an endorsement of the article's thrust or conclusion. You could argue it's taking things out of context but OTOH some statements have stand-alone value/accuracy - and of course a quote is just a quote

"It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants…birds…various insects…worms…and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us.”

On sci comm: openrxiv.org

Yeah that was the other sentence that lept out…

You mean like this? 😉 openrxiv.org

There are precedents for govt restrictions on who can publish what and of course the whole concept of peer review was established in the 60s to avoid this.

There is an instinctive appeal to that one. But as I said years ago, “you really want the government in control of this?”. That concern was dismissed at the time but now…

This is why the statement below's so important. Let's try to avoid those missteps this time, not succumb to fantasy economics and wishful thinking, be smart about funding infrastructure, and consider which parts of the ecosystem should be non-profit vs commercial 3/3 bsky.app/profile/rich...