A new study of college students has found that the majority turn to the campus newspaper for local news. Other interesting findings include the proportion reading the NY Times at least once a month (32%) and the fact that although students want video/vodcasts and blogs on their local campus paper, demand for podcasts appears to be quite low.
If you haven't visited the site in a while, take a look at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's education page. In particular, take a look at the Stand Up website. Now here is a publication aimed at the public. Check out the downloadable toolkit (this, I am disappointed in; I think of this more as a flier and less as a tool kit (What would a better toolkit actually look like?).
The Book Review section of The New York Times ran two articles in support–one directly, one indirectly–of traditional books. The first, Black Cloud, is about the digital age and its dependence on coal. The sidebar reads, “Our shiny white iPod economy is propped up by dirty black rocks.â€? The second article was a tiresome speech that John Updike delivered in front of a group of booksellers. This essay was a rea...
This article on Google's vertical content strategy highlights something that we need to consider carefully for all of our publishing efforts. It seems that we need to make our metadata (title, authors, even abstracts) accessible to Google, but that we also need to make sure that our full text is not picked up and cached. Do we have this covered for TCR and PocketKnowledge?
The race between traditional publishers and collaborative online projects continues, this time with a contest of sorts between an expended user "edited" Digg and the New York Times. Attention to the potential rivalry is fueling by the launch of Digg 3.0 scheduled for Monday, June 26th that will take the Digg experience into more general news categories. The Digg vs. NYT comparison is highlighted in this entry from...
Ten years from now, when a scholar lifts her digital pen from the page, where will her article go? There are more than a few possibilities (an academic journal, a vanity site, a digital repository), but a particularly perplexing possibility spans some of these categories: it may go up for sale.
Consider the following quote from a recent article:
At any rate, I was impressed with Digital Locker's evolution into Your Media Library. (A few months ago I posed the idea that the Digital Locker might be Amazon's secret weapon.) Not only can you pick up digital content there (I purchased a digital article, which was available within seconds), but you can also view all your historical purchases through Amazon and rate them, tag them, review them, and otherwise log your experience.
Let's return to our scholar…
Here is another idea for us to consider as we evolve our next publishing project. Following in the footsteps of Digg, the New Netscape will combine a social bookmarking approach with editorial work from "anchors" who will highlight items for readers. I would like to get some other opinions on this model. In particular, I wonder if this is a service that might be offered by the "World's Largest Education Libary" as part of its effort to inform patrons about developments in the field of education?
While searching for inspiration for our next publication, I ran across BrookSpeak.
Recent stories include:
"Religion should be allowed in schools"
"American education holds ZERO value"
"i-Parent is not student-friendly"
If you run across any other thoughtful and insightful high school blogs, I would love to hear about them!
Kate Wittenberg from the Electronic Publishing Project at CU suggests some new opportunities and directions for scholarly publishing in this article. It seems like there are some practical implications for our own publishing efforts in this.
The Center for New Media at Berkeley is holding a conference on electronic publishing. This conference is covered in the Contra Costa Times. After reading this article, I am even more skeptical about journal-publisher 'partnerships'; why does Berkeley need Elsevier? It is clear–to me–what Elsevier gains from the relationship, but it is not clear what Berkeley stands to gain.