Media bungles open access details

Several news outlets keep misreporting the public access mandate of a congressional funding bill. As open access blogger Peter Suber linkurl:posted;http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2007/11/more-jam-about-nih-policy.html last week, Nature News, linkurl:The Washington Post;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102668.html , the blog linkurl:Slashdot;http://science.slashdot.org/science/07/11/07/2318208.shtml, and several others all reported that a provision in

| 1 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
1:00
Share
Several news outlets keep misreporting the public access mandate of a congressional funding bill. As open access blogger Peter Suber linkurl:posted;http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2007/11/more-jam-about-nih-policy.html last week, Nature News, linkurl:The Washington Post;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102668.html , the blog linkurl:Slashdot;http://science.slashdot.org/science/07/11/07/2318208.shtml, and several others all reported that a provision in the congressional appropriations bill for 2008 would require NIH-funded researchers to publish in open access journals. On November 7, Nature News linkurl:reported;http://www.nature.com/news/2007/071107/full/450148a.html: "US investigators funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) may soon be compelled to publish only in journals that make their research papers freely available within one year of publication." What the bill actually says is that all NIH-funded research must be deposited in PubMed within one year of publication. There was a push to eliminate or alter this requirement in the bill last month, as I reported linkurl:here;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53746/, but those amendments did not pass. This bill was linkurl:vetoed;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53855/ today (November 13) by President Bush for its high spending level, but has been sent back to Capitol Hill for a vote to override the veto. Suber coined this common error made by media, agencies, and government JAM, or Journal-Archive Mixup. He has been tracking its occurrence for more than three years.
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Meet the Author

  • Andrea Gawrylewski

    This person does not yet have a bio.
Share
TS Digest January 2025
January 2025, Issue 1

Why Do Some People Get Drunk Faster Than Others?

Genetics and tolerance shake up how alcohol affects each person, creating a unique cocktail of experiences.

View this Issue
Sex Differences in Neurological Research

Sex Differences in Neurological Research

bit.bio logo
New Frontiers in Vaccine Development

New Frontiers in Vaccine Development

Sino
New Approaches for Decoding Cancer at the Single-Cell Level

New Approaches for Decoding Cancer at the Single-Cell Level

Biotium logo
Learn How 3D Cell Cultures Advance Tissue Regeneration

Organoids as a Tool for Tissue Regeneration Research 

Acro 

Products

Artificial Inc. Logo

Artificial Inc. proof-of-concept data demonstrates platform capabilities with NVIDIA’s BioNeMo

Sapient Logo

Sapient Partners with Alamar Biosciences to Extend Targeted Proteomics Services Using NULISA™ Assays for Cytokines, Chemokines, and Inflammatory Mediators

Bio-Rad Logo

Bio-Rad Extends Range of Vericheck ddPCR Empty-Full Capsid Kits to Optimize AAV Vector Characterization

Scientist holding a blood sample tube labeled Mycoplasma test in front of many other tubes containing patient samples

Accelerating Mycoplasma Testing for Targeted Therapy Development