Phil Bradley's responses in this thread seem to me to exemplify all that's
valuable about this medium, Many thanks Phil, and to Sociological Research
Online, a terrific journal with the courage to put such a sensitive
question into the open.
My own question here would be about purpose. In common with Education-line
where I work, I guess that Sociological Research Online has the serious and
essential purpose of deepening and broadening our collective understanding
of complex human affairs. Decisions about a hundred pounds as opposed to 25
or 50 pence, about licenses or tolls, about scholarly "authority", or any
other of the fascinating isssues that have been raised so far must
eventually (and perhaps sooner rather than later) be subordinated to the
uncomfortable question of what it's for in the first place.
I don't have neat answers here, but harbour a few anxieties. A voice on the
radio this morning reminds me that in the natural sciences, one measure of
the value of a scientific paper is the number of existing papers that it
makes redundant. Ginsparg's on-line work reminds me that referreed print
journals could become irrelevant to the development of knowledge (whatever
their value for individual careers and publishers in general).
One way of considering this might be to reject simple market models of
analysis, with clear distinctions between producer and consumer and
over-reliance on insitutionalised forms of quality assurance. Organic
processes of knowledge creation and development bring researchers, writers,
publishers, readers and practitioners into failry complex webs of
interdependence and mutual influence. The "knowledge" is a collective and
dynamic phenomenon in which many groups (including non-participants) have a
real interest which cannot necessarily be mediated by market structures.
Only some actors enter the market per se. Many others suffer (or enjoy) the
consequences of market decisions. Promoting only those aspects of this
knowledge which can be "bottom-lined" in a simple market framework could be
seen as a denial of this complexity - a denial that is likely to distort
the purchase of knowledge on reality. Some broader appreciation of purpose,
perhaps carried by professional associations, by libraries, or Governments
needs to be part of the discussion. To put this in crude metaphorical terms,
Socilogical Research Online (or Education-line) might be the betamax of
electronic publishing - or it might be the IBM PC. In either case, we
shouldn't put too much trust in the market. Collectively, we should develop
some idas about what it is we want to achieve.
Sam Saunders
--
Education-line, Brotherton Library
University of Leeds, LS 2 9TJ
0113 233 5525 phone 0113 233 5524 fax
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|