Re: UK Select Committee Inquiry into Scientific Publication

From: T W Graham <>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:17:46 +0100

Prior AmSci Topic Threads:
    "UK Select Committee Inquiry into Scientific Publication"


Interesting to go back to this given what the Select Committee said in
the Report. It indicates the way in which detail was picked up even when
that was not obvious to us and to Stevan.


-----Original Message-----
From: Frederick Friend
Date: 04 May 2004 22:41
Subject: Re: UK Select Committee Inquiry into Scientific Publication

Stevan does not allow for the way in which the questioning by the
Members of the Science and Technology Committee drove the course of the
oral evidence session. We were not invited to make an opening statement
which would have provided the kind of balanced overview of OA Stevan
wishes we had given.

Both Peter Fox and I managed to mention the words "institutional
repositories" even though we were not asked about them, and I brought
open access (in general) into the conversation a couple of times when
the question did not require me to do so. I have also been sent a
follow-up question about self-archiving to which I will be making a
written reply.

My impression is that the MPs are not ignoring self-archiving even if
their agenda is not as balanced as Stevan would wish, and - just to put
the record straight - I do give my full support to self-archiving.

Fred Friend

Frederick J. Friend
OSI Open Access Advocate
JISC Consultant
Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL E-mail
Mail address: The Chimes, Cryers Hill Road, High Wycombe, England HP15
6JS Telephone +44 1494 563168 or +44 7747 627738 (mobile)


    [MODERATOR'S NOTE: I agree completely with Tom Graham's point above
     about the eventual groundlessness of the a-priori worries and
     scepticism expressed early on regarding the likely outcome of the UK
     Select Committee's deliberations, given its vastly disproportionate
     initial emphasis on Open Access Publishing to the exclusion of
     Open Access Self-Archiving. In the event, the actual outcome
     was truly remarkable, and, one might add, remarkably wise and astute.
     How MPs managed to get it right, when the research (and library)
     community had been getting it so consistently muddled for years
     will also be fodder for future historians of the course of OA.
     But I suspect that the shrewdness and persistence of Dr. Ian Gibson,
     MP, might have had something to do with it. Perhaps also that of
     some other unsung heroes or heroines on the committee... -- S.H.]
Received on Fri Oct 01 2004 - 12:17:46 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:35 GMT