Isaac OstlundWe worry about the spread of #misinformation and "alternative facts" while gating academic and scientific research behind paywalls that grossly limit public access.
chiasm@IsaacOstlund There is a LOT of open access research available (I was just discussing mirror neurons with my family and had to find a few recent reviews)--but it is overwhelmingly not written for someone who isn't already an expert. And then the press release writers mangle it, the journalists oversimplify it, the public latches on to the wrong half, and it's a mess. I'm not sure where to start, tbh.
@chiasm the open access journals already extant are important and should be recognized for this. And I agree that most of the articles are difficult to approach so even if people have access to them they may not understand them. I still believe most of the "best" journals are limiting access to our detriment.
Hmm, but some sort of funding or maybe a position by journals for simplified but accurate reviews for the layman might be valuable. Instead of hoping the #media does it well.
@IsaacOstlund Both Science and Nature have open access science news pages that are written for an informed but not expert reader, come to think of it (as does Frontiers). The NIH in the US has pages and pages of public-oriented scientific information. But a position a journals for people who can accurately summarize and contextualize scientific articles as they are published would be excellent.
Peter van Heusden (he/him) 🗿@IsaacOstlund @chiasm much of the research on COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 was open source during the pandemic. Much of it still is. That hasn't stopped the spread of misinformation. Honestly, while I love open science practices, your post reads a bit like you haven't read up on the literature around how misinformation works.
@pvanheus @IsaacOstlund I haven't, but that wasn't the original question, which was about hiding stuff behind paywalls.