Archive for the ‘embargo watch honor roll’ Category
About a month ago, I suggested — based on an example of things gone wrong — that journals shouldn’t embargo papers that had already appeared on preprint servers. A little more than a week after that, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) seemed to agree.
And now, they’ve made it official. Here’s a note the journal sent its press list Friday: Read the rest of this entry »
On July 8, following a bit of a clumsy episode involving the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), I urged journals not to embargo papers that had already appeared as preprints.
A week later, this arrived in my inbox: Read the rest of this entry »
Patience is a virtue: Gastroenterology association changes embargo policy five years after criticism
More than five years ago, I took the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) to task for what I considered an ill-advised embargo policy in which scores of “article in press” papers in their journals were freely available online, but considered “embargoed.” And while change often comes slowly, it does in fact come.
On Tuesday, I reported that the journal PeerJ had broken its own embargo on a study of the brontosaurus, and had actually planned to in an attempt to “make sure it was published and online correctly before the press started linking to it.” The journal, as I noted, was in essence saying that it was “fine to make something available online but keep the embargo.” And there are other ways to ensure studies are available online when embargoes lift — something many journals, PNAS notably not included, have figured out.
The PeerJ policy had generated some criticism before the Embargo Watch post, and reactions on Twitter and elsewhere were also critical, with rare exceptions. Today, thanks to a comment by news release service Alpha Galileo, we learned that PeerJ has reversed its policy.
I asked PeerJ to confirm, and explain their rationale. They responded: Read the rest of this entry »
On Thursday, I wrote about a troubling embargo policy at the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) that forced reporters to agree not to seek outside comment on an investigation report before the embargo lifted, meaning only the CSB’s side of the story would make it into those first pieces.
Facing criticism, EASL changes its embargo policy — and earns a spot on the Embargo Watch Honor Roll
Yesterday, I criticized a strange embargo policy in place for an upcoming European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) conference. That policy, which drew Adam Feuerstein’s ire along with mine, allowed anyone who had paid to attend the April conference — including investors — to get abstracts this week, while they were still under embargo.
This morning, in an email to its press list, the EASL announced it was changing the policy: Read the rest of this entry »
The American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) has a new policy that’s a breath of transparent air into what can be an inconsistent area that many organizations would rather sweep under the rug: How to sanction embargo breakers. (Yes, I mixed some metaphors.)