Embargo Watch

Keeping an eye on how scientific information embargoes affect news coverage

“Incorrect advice” from Nature leads to arXiv embargo oddity

leave a comment »

cover_natureLast Wednesday, New Scientist’s Jacob Aron noticed something odd about a paper on arXiv:

The abstract page for the paper, “Relativistic boost as the cause of periodicity in a massive black-hole binary candidate,” included this note:

To appear as a Letter in the September 17, 2015 issue of Nature. Press embargo until 18:00 London time / 13:00 US Eastern Time on 16 September 2015

So there was the paper, freely available, and yet allegedly embargoed. That didn’t make much sense to me, so I asked Nature what was up. Turns out it was a mistake:

Authors are welcome to post pre-submission versions or the original submitted version of the manuscript on a preprint server at any time but should not indicate that these versions have been submitted to or accepted by Nature Publishing Group journals.  Unfortunately, in this case the author was given incorrect advice by an administrative member of staff who was not familiar with our policies.  We are acting to ensure such an error does not happen again.

This is hardly the first time arXiv preprints slated for publication in Nature have caused confusion.

Written by Ivan Oransky

September 21, 2015 at 9:00 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: