Topic 5: Reflection
Topic 5 bought to light a wide host of opinions and discussion surrounding the open access of online content, with particular regard to academia and scientific research. Should producers of highly sought over content post their work freely on the web? What are the true demographics that are being reached and what do online consumers want to see?
I’ve found that the majority of the UOSM2008 cohort constantly comes face to face with restricted journal access when trying to cite relevant work in our university assignments. Leigh explained how open access is essential for cross-disciplinary research; and Ben discussed how the idea would dramatically increase citations, unique visitors and accelerate the information distribution process. On the matter of content distribution, 100% of people that answered my poll believe that it would be UNETHICAL to withhold material of high academic value.
Moreover, Irinie was very much pro the concept, stating that it would not only benefit students, but also the UK economy. Studies have shown that over £1,000,000 can be saved with each 5% increase of openly accessible online material.
To contrast, it was insightful to read about Tamara’s opinion. After questioning her on why she believed the results of scientific discoveries should be monetised, she explained how the development of a new prescription drug may cost upwards of £2.5billion… Shocking. Restricted access is thus a sure-fire method of earning some of the funds.
I have made it clear that I am very much FOR open access. After reading through everyone’s thoughts on the topic, in an ideal world a middle ground would be formed – a medium in which content producers and consumers would be pleased with. Perhaps open access of academic material should be funded by the UK tax payer, as proposed by the Department for Business Innovation & Skills.
(300)
Comment Links:
https://tamaramanton.wordpress.com/2015/05/07/retrospect-topic-5-whos-the-dinosaur-in-the-room/
