He was talking to the CEO of Ecast. This company made a digital jukebox with a hard drive and a high-speed Internet connection so people can download individual songs from tens of thousands of online albums.

The CEO asked him to estimate what percentage of albums had at least one song downloaded every financial quarter, or every three months. Anderson guessed 20%. Just the “top 100” albums right? Only the most popular songs would be downloaded at least once every three months.

The correct answer was 98%!

Songs were downloaded from virtually all of the tens of thousands of albums available through Ecast at least once every three months.

Anderson confirmed these results with Netflix, Amazon.com and Apple’s iTunes. Approximately 90% of their individual movies, books, and songs were bought by someone at least once every three months.

In other words, people were no longer satisfied to see only the “blockbusters,” read only the “best-sellers,” and listen only to the “top 40.”

Abundant Choices Everywhere

Next, Anderson analyzed a month of downloaded songs from Rhapsody, an online music store. He defined “popularity” as the number of downloads. Songs that were downloaded many times must be more popular than songs that were downloaded fewer times. The resulting graph looked like this:

Ranked by popularity, downloads for the most popular songs started out high and dropped substantially, but never reached zero. Even the #100,000th song had thousands of downloads. Even the #400,000th song had downloads!

In other words, even the least popular songs were still being downloaded by someone. “No store could ever carry this much music,” Anderson writes.

Would you ever find the least popular songs in a record store? And how many traditional record stores sell individual songs? You have to buy an entire album just to get the few songs you really like.

Unless you have an iPod and a subscription to iTunes or Rhapsody. Then you’ll have access to many, many more songs than you could ever buy in a record store. Even a large one! And in a format no record store sells. You’re experiencing the Long Tail of music.

When you buy an obscure used book on Amazon.com, you’re experiencing the Long Tail of books. Would you have found that book at your local book store? What if you live 100 miles from the nearest large book store?

And when you watch an amateur comedy skit on YouTube, you’re experiencing the Long Tail of entertainment. Would CBS ever broadcast a six-minute amateur comedy skit? Would you ever see that obscure documentary you found on Netflix in a movie theater?

The Long Tail is about abundance. Abundant music, abundant books, and abundant entertainment. Abundant choices everywhere you look. Whatever you want, it’s probably out there somewhere. You just have to find it.

It hasn’t always been that way, has it?

Living a Life of Scarcity

Until the Internet and broadband access came along, most of us experienced an economy of scarcity. Especially if we lived far from a large metropolitan area.

Suppose you lived in a suburb of a small city 30 years ago. Suppose when you went shopping for jam, you only found strawberry jam, grape jam, and apple butter. That’s it.

Even if other types of jam were available, you wouldn’t know it, would you? Your small general grocery store had to sell everything, so they only had space for the most popular jams.

When you went shopping for music, you could only buy the “top 40” hits. The “top 100” albums. Your local music store couldn’t possibly carry every recording that had ever been made. Shelf space is expensive, so they only carried the music most people would buy.

But that was okay with you. The music they carried was the only music you knew, because that’s the only music your local radio station played. They played very popular music to generate a large audience for their advertisers.

You had a small book store close by, but a small book store couldn’t carry every book that has ever been published. So they only carried the “best sellers.” The books that most people would buy. Leasing and running a physical store is very expensive!

In other words, you lived a life of scarcity. Very few products, very few choices.

Technology to the Rescue!

Technology has changed all of that.

Sure, strawberry jam, grape jam, and apple butter are probably still the top-selling jams. But suppose you love lemon and discovered that lemon curd jam was available on Amazon.com.

“Jam on Amazon.com?” I hear you say. “I thought Amazon only sold books.”

Yes, Amazon revolutionized the used book industry in the mid-1990s. But in 1999, they went a step further and offered to advertise other companies’ products on their website. And not just books. Everything from furniture to sporting goods to jam.

Amazon grabbed the bull by The Long Tail so they could help you find the most obscure products in the world. Giving you many, many, many more products and many, many, many more choices.

It doesn’t even matter where you live anymore.

And when faced with more choices, many people investigate new music, new foods, and new entertainment.

And when they do, the world of limited “hits” and “best-sellers” descends into the Long Tail of “everything else.” Because most songs are not hits, most movies are not blockbusters, and most books are not best-sellers.

But millions of people think they might still be worth listening to, watching, and reading. That’s the Long Tail in action.

A world of abundant choices. That’s Life in the Long Tail.

The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. Chris Anderson. 2006. NY: Hyperion. http://www.TheLongTail.com

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

The study by LegitScript and KnujOn found that 80% of the sponsored pharmaceutical ads in Yahoo and Bing search results sold prescription drugs without a valid prescription. In some cases, the drugs were imported from India, which is a violation of U.S. law.

This even violates Yahoo’s own policy, which requires all Internet pharmacy advertisers to be based in the U.S. or Canada. But some Canadian advertisers that were approved by Yahoo imported the drugs from India, Singapore or Barbados.

In one case, a researcher ordered a drug without a prescription from a pharmacy advertised in Bing search results and received a counterfeit version of the drug.

The researchers also found that Microsoft was slow to respond to these violations of U.S. law. Shortly after the company vowed to take “immediate action … to remove any policy violators,” a researcher was able to buy a drug that is a controlled substance in some U.S. states from a Bing advertiser without a prescription.

KnujOn found that searchers who clicked an online pharmacy ad that appeared legitimate were sometimes redirected to an illegal Internet pharmacy.

“If the search engines continue to knowingly facilitate illegal prescription drug sales, then we’ll continue to issue these reports,” said KnujOn president Garth Bruen.

According to LegitScript’s web site, 98% of the online pharmacies in their database do not meet their standards for an Internet pharmacy (http://www.legitscript.com/standards). That’s 44,293 online pharmacies!

So before you order prescription drugs on the Internet, visit http://www.legitscript.com, enter the URL of the online pharmacy and click Validate. The company has 268 valid online pharmacies in its database, and 780 more are awaiting approval.

Sources:
http://www.pharmatimes.com/WorldNews/article.aspx?id=16473
http://www.legitscript.com
http://www.knujon.com/news.html

Copyright 2009, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

LinkedIn For Dummies by Joel Elad will tell you everything you need to know about LinkedIn, in language you can understand. It is filled with screen shots, lists, and detailed instructions for doing everything from signing up and creating a profile to finding venture capitalists and angel investors to fund your startup.

Yes, you can even look for business financing on LinkedIn. The Answers section of LinkedIn has two appropriate categories for this topic — Startups and Small Business, and Venture Capital and Private Equity.

And if you’re looking for venture capital for your startup, you can even use LinkedIn to find experienced professionals for your “dream team.” With tens of millions of experienced professional members, LinkedIn should be the first resource you use to recruit a management team.

You May Have to Pay

There’s just one problem. In order to use many of the advanced features of LinkedIn, you have to pay. And some of the paid plans are quite expensive.

For example, the free version of LinkedIn, which is called the Basic Plan, only allows you to communicate with people who are in your network. And only one, two, or three degrees away from you. You can’t communicate with people outside your network and you can’t even see their full profile. All you see is their name and a list of their job titles and educational degrees.

And the cheapest paid LinkedIn plan is $250 a year. But on this plan, you can only contact three people outside your network per month. If you want to contact more people per month, you have to upgrade to a more expensive plan.

So it seems clear who LinkedIn is targeting their services to — large companies who are looking for employees. These companies can afford to pay thousands of dollars a year to search for people using specifically targeted keywords. They can see everyone’s full profile, even if the person is not in their network.

But for job-hunters, it’s a different story. Unless you’re willing to pay hundreds of dollars a year, you won’t be able to do very much on LinkedIn.

What You Can Do For Free

On the Basic plan, you can create a detailed profile, join groups, and build a network. You can post questions and answers. You can get daily updates from your network and your groups. And you can search for people and companies.

But your search may turn up very limited results. You can only see a detailed profile of the people in your network.

Suppose, for example, you hear about a company that has an opening for which you’re qualified. You may have posted your resume on Monster, HotJobs, CareerBuilder, etc. The whole point of networking is to find someone in your personal network who knows someone at that company.

So you might start by searching for the company on LinkedIn. Once you find it, you can see a list of their employees who are on LinkedIn. And theoretically, you could find employees who are in your network and use that connection to get your foot in the door.

I said “theoretically” for a reason. There are two major problems with this scenario. Many employees don’t include their name in their profile. Just their job title. And without a name, you can’t see any connections.

It’s possible that many companies don’t allow their employees to reveal personal information on LinkedIn. Or employees don’t want their employer to know they’re job-hunting.

The second problem? On the Basic Plan, you won’t even be able to see many of the company’s employees. Instead, you’ll see a dozen or so, and then a large button that says, “Upgrade to See More Employees.”

My Experience With the Basic Plan

I know this from personal experience. Because I’m an independent contractor, I tried to use this technique to find clients. I know which job titles in my target market are likely to be the “ultimate decision maker.” And I already had a list of companies in my target market.

So I thought all I had to do was pull up company employees, find the right people by job title, and see if I was connected to them. Then I could use my connections to be introduced to them.

Unfortunately, I’m on the Basic plan. When I pulled up one company on LinkedIn, most of the employees listed had no personal names. Only job titles. And apparently, LinkedIn needs a personal name to connect people.

So LinkedIn couldn’t tell me if these company employees were connected to me. And I couldn’t see the full profile of any employee. I couldn’t contact them through LinkedIn, and I couldn’t get a phone number or an email address.

So on the Basic Plan, the best a job-hunter can do is create a detailed profile that is keyword optimized. And then sit back and wait for a company to contact you.

Is LinkedIn For the Fortune 500?

But a Fortune 500 company that can pay thousands of dollars a year can actively search for qualified people by keywords and use their connections to learn more about those people before they even contact them. A LinkedIn profile is much more detailed than a resume. It even has room for a picture!

So LinkedIn may be the ultimate manifestation of the phrase “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.”

In fact, LinkedIn could be thought of as a sophisticated recruiting tool for the Fortune 500, not a networking service for unemployed professionals. Maybe that’s why there are over 130,000 recruiters on LinkedIn, according to LinkedIn For Dummies.

So if you work among the Fortune 500, see my review of Joel Elad’s book, LinkedIn For Dummies, in the social media ezine, Social Media Examiner.

If you’re job-hunting, you can also benefit from the book. Just remember that you won’t be able to do very much unless you sign up for one of the paid plans.

How are you using LinkedIn? Has anyone found a job using the Basic Plan exclusively?

Feel free to post your comments.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

Before I can convince you to use YouTube to market your business, we have to talk about traditional advertising and how social media are changing advertising forever.

Traditional advertising is what Dave Evans, author of Social Media Marketing an Hour a Day, calls “interruptive advertising.” The ad has to “interrupt” you and get your attention. Then — and only then — can it deliver the advertiser’s message.

If you don’t believe me, remember the last time you watched TV? Don’t TV commercials interrupt you? What do you normally do when a commercial comes on? Do you always sit there and watch it?

How about reading the local newspaper? I don’t know about your paper, but my paper’s editors literally cover the bottom half of most pages with ads. And copywriters are taught to grab the reader’s attention within the first five or ten seconds!

In other words, most traditional ads are an “in your face” attempt to get your attention.

Traditional Media Versus Social Media

Compare this to a video ad on YouTube. “A video ad?” I hear you say. “I didn’t even know you could do that!”

I’m guessing there are many things you don’t know about YouTube.

How do you see video ads on YouTube? How would you find most advertising on YouTube?

Only when you actively search for it. Like using Google to search the Internet. Do you see the difference?

No more “interruptive” advertising. You only see ads that you choose to see. Why would you choose to see it? Because you have a problem and you’re looking for a solution.

“But I have to interrupt people, don’t I?” I hear traditional advertisers saying. “How else can I get their attention?

Why would you provide a solution to people who don’t have that particular problem?

Traditional mass media throw a single solution out to millions of people, most of whom don’t need it at that particular moment. Will they remember your commercial when they do?

Social media maintain a searchable archive of millions of solutions, created by people who have successfully solved a particular problem. And most people prefer to get their solutions from people they know and trust. Not Madison Avenue, which they normally distrust.

Advertising on Social Media

So here is how you advertise on YouTube and other social media. You upload your video ad to your Facebook Page or YouTube Channel. Then you rely on people’s natural desire to find a solution to their problem at the time they experience the problem. The first thing they will do is search for a solution.

They may call a friend or neighbor. They may get on the Internet. Or they may use social media to find someone they know who can recommend someone who has a solution to their problem.

Now they are actively seeking a solution to their problem. Do you see the difference between this and a TV commercial?

And they might be thrilled to discover that your company has solved their problem. And if your solution is best described in a video, they would be overjoyed!

After all, who wants to read a boring company report when they can watch a video?

If you want to learn much more about YouTube and how you can use it to market your business, please see my review of the book, YouTube and Video Marketing an Hour a Day by Greg Jarboe on Social Media Examiner.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

Have you given up on Twitter? Think Facebook is for kids? And YouTube is where you go to watch funny pet videos?

If you feel that way, please take a look at Social Media Examiner, a new ezine that covers social media. This ezine was created specifically for businesses to help you navigate the social media jungle.

And to teach you how to use social media to find product evangelists who will advertise your business for you absolutely free!

Here’s an example:

This man freely advertises Harley Davidson bikes!

Have you ever seen a man who loves Harley-Davidson motorcycles so much, he has the company’s name tattooed on his arm? He freely advertises Harley-Davidson everywhere he goes.

That’s a product evangelist!

So how do you find product evangelists to advertise your business for free? On social media!

But it’s not just about finding product evangelists. It’s about talking to your customers and listening to what they say. And showing that you care about what they say.

They’re already talking about you on social media — wouldn’t you like to participate in these conversations?

So can I tell you how to get college-level training in social media marketing for just $30? Take a look at my review of Dave Evans’ book, Social Media Marketing an Hour a Day on Social Media Examiner.

This book will teach you everything you need to know about using social media to market your business. Every weekday for three months, you will have a one-hour assignment to complete. By the time you “graduate,” you’ll have a social media marketing plan that you can implement immediately.

And be sure to subscribe to Social Media Examiner. It’s free and it’s filled with actionable advice about social media.

And every month I’ll review another social media book.

After all, it’s a jungle out there! Let the experts guide you in this new advertising medium.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

Photo and Tattoo used with permission of Tattoo Artist Daniel Upton, Golden Apple Studios, Austin TX.

Yes, I am serious.

I can understand your reaction if you think only 17-year-olds use Facebook. But listen to this: “The fastest growing demographic is the 35-54 year olds … the next fastest growing demographic is the over-55 crowd.”

That’s Paul Dunay and Richard Krueger, authors of Facebook Marketing For Dummies, speaking.

Yes, the Dummies series finally contains a book that explains why a business executive might want to use Facebook. Because one of the principles of marketing is to hang out where your customers hang out.

And these days, many of your customers are hanging out on Facebook. Yes, they are primarily trying to stay in touch with their friends, children and grandchildren.

But suppose one of their friends reports an unpleasant experience at a restaurant, and they confirm that negative feedback with their own disastrous experience. Right there on Facebook for all the world to see.

If you owned or managed that restaurant, wouldn’t you like to know about these comments? They’re happening right now in social media whether you know about it or not. Wouldn’t it be better to know?

And if you have a Facebook Page — the business equivalent of a Profile — your customers can become “fans” of your Page. They can post information about your business and recommend your Page to their friends. Every interaction with your Page will generate a News Feed that all of their friends will see.

And did you know that you can advertise on Facebook?

Facebook indexes every member’s profile in detail. So when you create your ad, you can include keywords to describe your target audience.

“By adding keywords to your targeting, you can reach consumers based on the interests listed on their profile page. Never before has there been a mass medium that allows for this kind of precise targeting. Identifying and then reaching a specific audience has never been this exact and cost-effective until now,” say Dunay and Krueger.

And did I mention that Facebook Pages are indexed by Google and other search engines?

Are you starting to see the business case for participating in social media?

If so, please read my review of Dunay and Krueger’s book.

And for more articles about Facebook, please visit Social Media Examiner, a new ezine about all kinds of social media.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

Yes, many people just use Twitter to share their day with their friends. Friends who may live 2,000 miles away.

And some people use it to broadcast a breaking news story as it happens. Like the time a plane crash-landed in the Hudson River. A man in one of the rescue boats with a SMS-enabled cell phone got the “scoop” on that story before the news media reported it.

“That’s certainly dramatic,” you say. “But how do I create a marketing message in only 140 characters?”

You can start by buying Twitter Marketing For Dummies by Kyle Lacy. Yes! There’s a Dummies book about Twitter Marketing now.

Go to SocialMediaExaminer to see the rest of my review of this book.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

He was the famous mythologist — author of The Hero With a Thousand Faces and many other books — who told us all to “follow your bliss” in his Power of Myth PBS specials with Bill Moyers in the late 1980s.

“That’s all well and good,” you may have thought at the time. “But I have to make a living. How do I make money by following my bliss?”

If you’ve been asking that question for the past 20 years, you’ll be happy to know that someone has finally answered it. Gary Vaynerchuk has written a book to teach us how to make money by following our bliss.

Many of you may know Vaynerchuk as the host of the video blog WineLibraryTV.com. Now he has written a book titled Crush It! Why Now is the Time to Cash in on Your Passion.

Please see Social Media Examiner for the rest of my review of this book.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley

SMR Information Solutions

And he used social media to do it.

His YouTube videos got 110 million views, estimated to be 14.5 million hours of viewing. Mass media advertising to reach that many viewers would have cost $47 million.

A famous rapper made a promotional video that gave him even more free publicity.

At the time of the election, he had five million fans on Facebook — over four million more than his opponent. On MySpace, the numbers were approximately 800,000 and 200,000, respectively. On Twitter, he had over 100,000 followers and his opponent had about 5,000.

And he rode that social media train all the way to the White House.

“If not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president or even the democratic nominee,” said Arianna Huffington.

Specifically, if not for social media, Barack Obama would not have become the 44th president of the United States.

And that is how social media are changing the world as we know it.

Erik Qualman wrote a book about this and called it Socialnomics: How Social Media Transforms the Way We Live and Do Business. Its tagline is “it’s a people-driven economy, stupid!”

For more information about Socialnomics, read my review of this book on SocialMediaExaminer.com.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley
SMR Information Solutions

The discussion was started by an unemployed scientist who wondered “how do you access current scientific literature if you don’t have company or university access?”

Traditionally, the reports of most scientific research are published in scientific journals. Journals like Science, Nature, JAMA, and the Journal of Molecular Biology. In order to read the articles, you would have to subscribe to the journal. Just like you subscribe to Time magazine.

But these scientific journals are much more expensive than Time magazine. You would have to pay hundreds and even thousands of dollars a year to subscribe to just one! For that reason, most people can’t afford to subscribe to scientific journals.

But a large university library can afford to subscribe to them. And large companies can afford to subscribe to them.

So if you want to read an article in a scientific journal, you have to go to a large university library. You can’t go to a company library, because only employees have access to their company’s library.

But what if you don’t live near a large university? What if you don’t work for a large company? That’s why this scientist started a discussion on LinkedIn. He was unemployed, and didn’t have access to a large university library or a large company library.

But he still wanted to read articles in scientific journals to keep up with scientific advancements and increase his chances of getting another job. And he wanted recent articles.

Publishers Control Access to Scientific Information

The discussion this scientist started eventually accumulated over 70 comments. As a former reference librarian and current independent researcher, I added my own comments.

First, I listed several sources of free scientific reports, such as PubMed, Highwire, and Scirus.

Unfortunately, many of these free resources don’t have recent articles. By recent, I mean articles that were published in the past few weeks or months. Many of the articles on these free websites are six months old and even older.

That’s because the publishers who publish scientific journals control access to scientific information.

It starts when a scientist finishes his research project, writes the report, and sends it to a scientific publisher. The editors who work for the publisher read the report and decide whether it’s worth publishing.

Then they send it to other scientists who work in the same subject area. What do they think about the report? Is it worth publishing? Do they have any ideas for making the report better?

This process is called peer review. Publishers believe they add value to scientific reports by asking other scientists to review every scientific report before it is published. They use peer review to ensure that only the highest quality research is published.

They also hire editors to edit the reports and invite advertisers to advertise in the journal. Then they send all the articles and ads to a printer, who prints the journal.

And they say all of this added value costs money. A lot of money.

So once a publisher publishes a report, they do not allow it to be published anywhere else. For at least six months. Sometimes for one year.

This is called an embargo. It maximizes the publisher’s return on its investment. All ad revenues and subscription fees are paid to the publisher. They don’t have to share their profits with any other distributor.

And resources like PubMed, Highwire, and Scirus must obey that embargo. They cannot include recent reports on their website until the embargo date has passed. That is why you can’t even find reports in PubMed until six months or more after they were published.

And that is why it is so hard to access recent scientific articles. If they’re not in PubMed, how do you find them? Many scientists at large universities just go to the library and browse through recent issues of scientific journals to find recent scientific reports.

Of course, this means you have to guess which journal published a report. And what if you don’t have easy access to a large university library?

Your Tax Dollars Paid For the Research!

And did you know that Americans pay for most scientific research done in the U.S? Your federal income taxes support the National Institutes of Health (NIH), one of the largest providers of grant money to American scientists.

For this reason, many scientists, librarians, politicians, and taxpayer representatives believe that all research funded by taxpayers should be available free of charge. With no embargo period! They call their movement the Open Access (OA) movement.

In fact, the NIH implemented an open access policy in 2005. Under this policy, all scientists whose research was funded by the NIH were asked to submit their final report to PubMed Central. PubMed Central is an online source of free scientific reports.

One year later, the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) was introduced into Congress. It took the voluntary NIH open access policy and made it mandatory. And it expanded the number of federal agencies covered by the policy.

So all researchers funded by the following federal agencies would be required to place a copy of their final report in PubMed Central and possibly other OA websites:

• Department of Agriculture
• Department of Commerce
• Department of Defense
• Department of Education
• Department of Energy
• Department of Health & Human Services, including NIH
• Department of Homeland Security
• Department of Transportation
• Environmental Protection Agency
• NASA
• National Science Foundation

Unfortunately, FRPAA never made it into law back then. So six congressmen from both parties introduced it again in 2009. Both the House and Senate are reviewing the act. Supporters say the bill finally has a good chance of passing in both chambers.

And Barack Obama believes in open access, so if the bill passes, he will most likely sign it.

If so, copies of reports from most federally funded scientific research would be placed in PubMed Central and other open access websites, where they would be available for free to anyone, anywhere.

Naturally, many publishers oppose FRPAA.

“Non-profit and commercial publishers invest hundreds of millions of dollars every year in the peer review, editing, publishing, disseminating and archiving of scholarly journal articles,” says a report from the Professional Scholarly Publishing division of the American Association of Publishers. Publishers just want to “recoup their investments.”

But FRPAA still lets scientific publishers print scientific journals and place an embargo on every report they publish. And they can charge whatever they want for the journals.

University of California Fires the First Shot

The University of California Libraries sent a letter to all faculty members in June 2010. The letter announced a potential boycott of Nature Publishing Group (NPG), a company that publishes 85 different scientific journals.

Like many state universities struggling to operate during the recession, UC faces severe budget cuts. Between 2005 and 2009, its library budget for books, magazines and journals only increased seven percent. During that same time period, NPG increased its subscription fees 137 percent!

UC librarians say many other publishers have worked with them to give them a fair deal under the circumstances. But not NPG. The publisher told UC it will increase the subscription fees for its journals 400 percent in 2011.

So a group of faculty members from one of the largest university systems in the world is seriously considering boycotting one of the biggest scientific publishers in the world. “UC scholars can help break the monopoly that commercial and for-profit entities like NPG hold over the work that we create,” the UC librarians and faculty members said in their letter.

Yes, that work was created by scientists working at a publicly funded state university, using grant money ultimately derived from U.S. taxpayers.

And scientific reports can now be placed on the Internet, where they can be read and downloaded by anyone, anywhere, any time. Including unemployed scientists who have no access to a large university library.

Which raises the following questions:

• Do we even need printed journals anymore?
• Why should libraries subscribe to journal articles that no one will ever read?
• Can we move to an iTunes model where users pay only for what they download?
• If so, what would be a reasonable fee for a single scientific report?
• Could universities become publishers and publish their own scientific reports?

In other words, is the traditional publishing industry becoming obsolete?

The first scientific journal published in English was the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1667. Maybe it’s time to drag scientific publishers – kicking and screaming – from the 17th century into the 21st.

Copyright 2010, Ruth M. Shipley
SMR Information Solutions