Source: Adage.com (2 in one day!), “A new model for digital publishing…From an academic journal?: Why this blogger’s excited about scitable,” by Chris Abraham, 7/14/09.
Abraham begins by citing National Press club event called, “What will we tell Peoria: The disappearance of Washington bureaus and what comes next”; he links to the video. He compares the whining over the death of good news for the public (in favor of the rise of TMZ!) to what the journal of Nature is doing with Scitable. Quote:
Mr. Savkar [publishing director, Scitable] realized that there is a lot of crap, misinformation, outdated info and rubbish online, especially in science. Even the content that is legit is neither guided nor contextual. And content without context is hard to digest. When I think of dodgy content that does a pretty good job of informing but is not cite-worthy, I think of Wikipedia.
Scitable is a direct response to Wikipedia. While Wikipedia a great tool for generalists, faculty of science know that it is not a definitive source. The first goal Mr. Savkar set was to make sure Scitable was as easy to use as Wikipedia while approaching all the content through rigorous editorial processes and review.
Abraham considers Scitable an “exemplary model” of contemporary publishing.
