For today’s typical college student, Google would most probably be the first choice for doing research; YouTube the choice model for creating online content; and an online discussion thread one conventional method to do class work. The Internet has paved the way for new forms of publishing; all it takes is a few mouse clicks to access and read a plethora of materials. The impact of the World Wide Web on learning has become so profound that even scholarly papers are becoming more interactive, posted on the net complete with sounds, videos, discussions, and even animation.
“It used to be just text,” says journalism professor Danilo Arao who heads the Office of Research and Publication of the UP College of Mass Communication’s Department of Journalism. “But with the Internet revolutionizing publication, you no longer need to be a large publishing company or a mainstream media corporation to reach a particular audience.” With search engines, blogs, social networking sites, RSS aggregators, e-books, and other tools providing easy means of self-publishing, academics are becoming less bound by cloistered traditions of scholarship and are making their insights easily accessible to the public.
Books, both in their pdf and audio formats (as opposed to their more conventional material counterpart), can be as easily ‘read’ using an iPod player. Multiple users need no longer worry about sharing limited printed copies available in the library. Authors, meanwhile, can not only revise their works freely, but also experiment with new styles of publishing. Cyberspace, in other words, liberates the text from the bookstore or library and creates possibilities for its use alongside advancements in technology. Some scientists are even going outside the system of peer-reviewed journals by simply posting new research directly on personal or communal websites for open public access.
Different format, same standards
This should not be a cause for worry, according to Arao, because online publishing also follows the same basic principles and standards of print publishing. “There may be specific technological nuances but the underlying concepts—aesthetics, functionality, accessibility, and readability—are the same,” he says. “Here, as in print publishing, content is king.”
The problem, he says, is when people get so mesmerized by the latest tools, software upgrades, or plug-ins that they completely forget about the primary reason for publishing in the first place. “If you are an academic writing for a Filipino audience, would you not be sensitive to their values and preferences? Similarly, if you are writing for a particular age group, should you not design something that best grabs their attention?” Sometimes even something as basic as font size can spell a huge difference. “If you are writing for children, should you not use larger fonts? If you are publishing for the visually impaired, on the other hand, should you not employ widgets or plug-ins that make it more accessible to them?” It is important to come up with websites that do not particularly discriminate against other readers while catering to a particular audience.
Ironically, sometimes the very applications used to develop websites are themselves the reason for their limited accessibility. Websites created using some WYSIWIG (what you see is what you get) web-building tools, for instance, can only be viewed through particular browsers, if not through specific commercial platforms. “This is why I discourage my students from learning WYSIWYG applications without first mastering the basics of plain HTML coding,” notes Arao.
Blogging 101
There are practically no restrictions to what may be published on the web. But, as in life, says Arao, one has to be careful and responsible enough to protect his image and reputation. Arao keeps a personal blog, Rising Sun, which serves as a platform for his political views. He also sits on the board of editors of the online news magazine Bulatlat. In his case, the principles, ethics, and standards he upholds as a journalist are also evident in his online activities. “I make sure everything I publish is accurate, done with due research, and fair. I do not flame. And while I sometimes talk about personal aspects of my life, they touch on the national concerns of the website.” While many bloggers may not be journalists or professional writers, Arao believes they have to exercise a certain level of voluntary restraint. “It is just like observing proper public decorum. One cannot just write anything just because he owns the blog,” he says.
Nevertheless, to dismiss blogging as a bad idea altogether is to let pass an immense opportunity. People maintain personal blogs or websites for a number of different reasons. Some blog to blow off steam. Some find in blogs an outlet for pursuing nonacademic interests. Others, meanwhile, see blogs as an extension of their academic or professional identity. Their blogs allow them not only to express personal musings, but also to debate ideas, swap views about their disciplines, and connect to a wider public. For many scholars, blogging has evolved from a mere pastime to an integral element of their academic existence. Moreover, such online presence provides a freedom and flexibility that mainstream academic publishing cannot provide. Consider, for instance, the number of years it takes to publish one’s research in a peer-reviewed journal. Add to that a few more years before other scholars cite one’s research in their own articles. A blog, by contrast, is published immediately, and the blogger can expect to receive feedback in hours.
But still not academic
Interestingly, many in the academe have started to blog primarily because of their frustration at how scholarship is viewed within their very own disciplines. The fact remains that hiring, promotion, and tenure committees in many large academic institutions do not yet consider digital text on an equal footing with printed text. In order to win tenure or to be promoted, according to a Sept. 12, 2005 story in the Limited Knowledge website, an aspiring faculty member must publish in well-respected, typically high-cost, academic journals. Since many tenure committees tend to equate low acceptance with prestige and publishers charge a higher premium for these journals, the best articles by the most distinguished faculty are actually being published in expensive academic publications, which, chances are, even the most interested readers can barely afford. Elsevier, the largest science and technology journal publisher, for instance, maintains an average acceptance rate of only twenty percent and charges from $3,000 to $5,000 for an annual journal subscription.
The US Public Interest Research Group, in a November 13, 2005 article, revealed how academic journal prices increased by almost a third between 2000 and 2004, an increase of more than three times the actual rate of inflation in the US during the period. Faced with such constraints, even big academic institutions such as Cornell University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison were forced to cancel their subscription to hundreds of Elsevier journals in 2003.
Well-established academic online journals themselves cannot seem to transcend the standards of their print counterparts. Fatima Lasay, former UP Fine Arts Associate Professor and currently a member of the editorial board of the Leonardo Electronic Almanac (LEA), believes that the real challenge is for the online system to redefine not only the traditional print paradigm but also the very basis and standards of scholarship shaped for centuries by the “Gutenberg revolution.” Many, even in academe, still maintain a narrow view as to what constitutes good scholarship; many still believe only books and journals qualify as reputable venues for publication of credible research. This despite the fact that many digital monographs are as, if not more, intellectually vigorous than their print counterparts.
LEA was inaugurated in 1992 as the electronic arm of the respected peer-reviewed Leonardo Art Science and Technology Journal. As with any academic publishing system, LEA has an editorial team and employs external consultants who work together with readers and authors in determining the content and direction of the publication.
“We know that peer review is a very subjective process even though it has been used over the last century in judging the quality of research,” Lasay notes. Given the biases and limitations of peer review, she believes the whole process should be reinvented, particularly, through a mechanism that allows instantaneous feedback, backtracking, versioning (to continue working on the text even after its publication), and machine-readable licenses enabled by online systems. She insists that the electronic network, in fact, should also allow the wider intellectual community to participate in the peer review process instead of leaving it in the hands of a few experts.
Peer reviewers, typically composed of three experts, assess each article and recommend only what they consider the most significant new work. In many elite scientific journals, less than one out of ten articles submitted are actually accepted. Many of the rejected articles, however, eventually see print in a plethora of less prestigious or less widely-read specialty journals. Nevertheless, as recent events have shown, even the traditional peer review system is not foolproof in weeding out faulty scholarship. About a year ago, for instance, the prestigious US academic journal Science was forced to retract two papers it had published when it discovered all too late that South Korean Hwang Woo-Suk and his team’s stem cell research were all a sham.
LEA uses the same review system as its print counterpart, which is commonly practiced in almost all major academic publications. “But for me, this shouldn’t be the case,” says Lasay. “The online system is a radically different system that should transform for the better and not simply mimic the scholarly traditions that we have been used to.”
Not a panacea
Yet, it would probably take a lot of time before the digital edition can even gain parity with their print equivalents, especially in a developing country like the Philippines. “It has nothing much to offer, to begin with, if the purpose is to reach out to the marginalized in society,” says Arao. Despite efforts in the academe, the reality is that the digital divide, made deeper by economic disparities, still leaves many out of the conversation. “For one, there is always the limitation of Internet access in this country. Broadband connectivity remains very, very low. PC penetration, on the other hand, is probably just around 1.5 percent.” The only advantage Arao sees to online publishing is the potential of reaching migrant Filipinos who are mostly working in industrialized countries with well-developed Internet infrastructures. He also cautions against overexcitement over new media and points out that the introduction of new technology does not necessarily mean the end of another.
According to Arao, even cause-oriented groups still prefer traditional media like newspapers, radio, and television to get their message across. And while online publishing is no doubt much cheaper compared to print media, the main consideration is still reaching one’s intended audience. “Should you go online if you want to, say, reach out to the indigenous people who do not yet even have access to something as basic as potable water and electricity?”
But even those who do have access to the Internet still face common difficulties such as dealing with costs—not necessarily of online publishing per se, but of meeting the technical requirements of publication. “You need to have a computer, a relatively fast Internet connection, as well as hardware and software components—none of which are free.” And given that many still run their computers using bootlegged Microsoft products, Arao fears the government’s own effort to curb software piracy might even pose a problem in the near future.
Several years ago, former UP President Francisco Nemenzo called for an end to digital imperialism by giant software companies and enticed colleagues and students to shift to open source applications. Unfortunately, even in the University, the migration did not enjoy a good following. “Apparently, old habits die hard and people are still lukewarm about shifting away from Microsoft platforms in spite of the availability of more reliable cost-free alternatives,” says Arao.
But the most powerful obstacle to widening scholarship through the Internet, according to Lasay, is not technical inadequacy but the very politics within academia. Since it was the academic community which pioneered online publishing four decades ago, she believes it is well aware of online publishing’s significant potential within and beyond the academic community. But as long as academics remain passive about old-boy networks and status-quo thinking, cyberspace will continue to exist as second-rate publishing venues.
Challenge to publishers and the academe
Two new scientific publications, both available only online, may portend what lies ahead: PloS ONE and the Journal of Visualized Experiments (JOVE).
PLoS ONE (www.plosone.org), an online journal of science established by the Public Library of Science (PLoS) in December 2006 and maintaining offices at the UK and the US, aims to put as many new scientific articles as possible on the Internet to be read, distributed, and reproduced by anyone for free as long the original work is properly cited. The journal employs a business model common to most open-access publications in which expenses—including those incurred from peer review, journal production, and online hosting and archiving—are subsidized by charging a publication fee to the authors or research sponsors for the articles they publish. Although it employs professional and academic editors that evaluate papers for publication, papers published in PLoS ONE are available for commenting and debate by the readers, making every paper the start of a scientific conversation. Eventually, their contributions become part of the original article.
The US-based Journal of Visualized Experiments or JoVE (www.myjove.com), on the other hand, operates very much like a kind of YouTube for researchers in the life sciences. Using a video-based approach to scientific publishing, it works on the assumption that actual visualization greatly facilitates the understanding and proper replication of fundamental experimental techniques. Through this approach, users are able to save time learning and applying laboratory techniques, and also share their own efficient and effective innovations.
Arao believes it may be possible to replicate such an experience in the Philippines. Despite our country’s technological backlog, academics normally have access to the Internet. The prospect is even more promising in institutions with well-established academic reputations and international contacts such as the University of the Philippines. “And if your intention is to disseminate knowledge rather than gain points for promotion, I think cyberspace offers one of the best venues,” he adds.
The debates on and issues surrounding online publishing may not be resolved soon. In the meantime, one might seek comfort in the belief that if a work is good, then word will spread.
|
browse the archives
