[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AAAS and JSTOR issues

I, too, am disappointed in the withdrawal of Science from JStor. JStor has been and continues to be one of the very best projects to take advantage of the Internet.

There is a key difference, however, in the missions of AAAS and JStor. JStor is dedicated to serving the public and non-profit sectors (to the best of my knowledge, and I speak from experience, JStor does not grant licenses to for-profit institutions). AAAS, itself a non-profit, has a broader mission and broader audience. If AAAS maintains an exclusive relationship with JStor, it would not be possible for its profit-side audience to enjoy access to Science archives.

If JStor were to become AAAS's vendor for non-profit and government agencies, all sides of the equation might be well served---AAAS's broader audience would have access to the archive through other means and JStor would be able to keep this title and its mandate.

If I am speaking through my hat, I welcome the correction of someone closer to either party.

Cheers,

Elizabeth E. Kirk
Associate Librarian for Information Resources
Dartmouth College Library
6025 Baker-Berry Library, Rm. 115
Hanover, NH 03755-3525
telephone: (603) 646-9929
fax: (603) 646-3702
Elizabeth.E.Kirk@dartmouth.edu


On Sep 7, 2007, at 8:56 PM, dcarlson@lib.siu.edu wrote:

It does not seem to have garnered much listserv attention, but I think most liblicense readers are aware of the AAAS decision to withdraw its premier publication, Science magazine, from JSTOR. I was very disappointed with this decision. I recently sent a letter to the chair of AAAS, John Holdren, expressing my concerns and my hope that AAAS would reconsider its decision. A copy of my letter is below in plain and simple (but easily exchanged) ASCII text.

My letter was sent in late August and I have not yet rec'd a response; I don't know if I will.

I would hope that some of you agree with my comments and would find the time to express your concerns to AAAS as well. If any of my language or arguments are useful to you, you are more than welcome to edit or borrow liberally and without attribution.

-- David Carlson, Dean
Library Affairs
SIU Carbondale

---------- text of letter ------------

August 28, 2007

Dr. John Holdren, Chair
Board of Directors
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Kennedy School of Government
Mailbox 53
79 JFK Street
Cambridge, MA 02138-5801

Dear Dr. Holdren:

In your role as Chair of the Board of Directors for the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), I am writing to
express my disappointment and disagreement over the recent decision
of AAAS to ends it participation in JSTOR with Science. It is a
mistaken and regrettable decision that, in my judgment, is counter
to the mission and values of AAAS. I urge the Board to conduct some
additional review and reconsider the decision. Most of my analysis
and comments in this letter are based on the AAAS announcement of
the decision. The announcement contains the only access I have to
explanation and rationale.

The announcement states that AAAS "conducted a series of
comprehensive consultations with our customers and readers around
the world." Is there a report on the outcome of these
consultations? Based on my experience, I am very hard pressed to
believe that your "customers and readers" indicated dissatisfaction
with JSTOR and your participation in it. I have met researchers who
have been unfamiliar with JSTOR, but I have never met a researcher
who had used JSTOR and was anything but effusive in their regard
and praise for it.

As Dean, when I talk with teaching faculty and researchers, it is
striking to me how many faculty specifically mention their joy in
using JSTOR and what an asset it is to them in their research. They
identify JSTOR's inter-disciplinary research, deep and continuous
backfile coverage, vetted resources of academic quality, and
integrity of digital representation as special qualities. Faculty
have a number of concerns about the use of electronic resources,
such as generally accessible web sites, aggregator databases and
other resources, but I have found them united in their opinion on
the extraordinary and unique value of JSTOR. Can you provide me
with more information about the consultations you conducted and the
nature of concerns that were revealed?

Your news release states that a major element of your decision is
based on your concern to control your content in the context of a
rapidly changing "business environment". I agree: AAAS needs to run
an effective and even profitable business operation. I also agree
with your identification of the challenges of a business
environment "in a constant state of transition [with] dramatic
technological and competitive changes." In my judgment, this is an
argument for continuing and, indeed, furthering your partnership
with JSTOR. As an organization that is barely ten years old, JSTOR
was born in this environment. In this brief period of rapid change
and transition, JSTOR has become a singular success in the academic/
research community. I cannot think of a better, more appropriate
partnership than JSTOR for AAAS to manage the challenges of these
"dramatic technological and competitive changes."

Your emphasis on content control for this decision is not just the
wrong emphasis -- it is in opposition to the mission and values of
AAAS. When I connect to the AAAS web site, I find a summation of
what AAAS stands for: advancing science, serving society. On the
web site, this phrase is in a prominent position, upper left
corner, immediately beneath the AAAS logo. It is so important that
I failed to find an AAAS web page in which the phrase and logo were
not included. The decision to withdraw from JSTOR is not in the
interests of science nor society. Indeed, JSTOR has been an
effective vehicle by which science and the AAAS mission of service
to society has been advanced.

This justification of content control puzzles me further because
your participation in JSTOR is no abdication of control. JSTOR does
not control the content and there is no loss of control by your
participation.

As partial justification of your decision, your announcement talks
about the responsibility to "maintain a complete electronic archive
and to fully integrate that historical content with our very latest
published materials." The content of Science, past and current, is
a tremendous value and resource. However, this focus on your
content and integration is misguided. The single-minded approach
eliminates the inestimable value that occurs when Science is
integrated and combined with the knowledge and insights of other
disciplines and scholarly inquiry. JSTOR provides AAAS with a
responsible and controlled means of extending the reach of your
content into disciplines that might not encounter it otherwise.
With this decision, you lose this unique and powerful tool of
integration which JSTOR so elegantly and effectively provides.
Moreover, you could integrate your current content with historical
content and still maintain your participation in JSTOR. I am
confident that JSTOR would be very interested to work with you on
closer integration with their database and your other content. Did
you explore such possibilities with them?

JSTOR and Science are both strategic resources of great value to
the academic/research community. JSTOR has achieved this status in
a little more than a decade in an environment of technological and
competitive change. Science has achieved its strategic value
differently based on its commitment to science, exceptional
content, and long history. When these two vital organizations
cooperate in their assets and services, the combination is
powerful. The participation of Science made a unique and
irreplaceable contribution to the resources and cross-disciplinary
value of JSTOR. Your decision to withdraw has diminished the
contribution of Science to society, the academy, and the community
of scholars; tragically, it has also diminished the value of JSTOR.
I have every confidence that JSTOR's success will continue and the
organization will thrive but the removal of participation by
Science is nonetheless a strategic loss which hurts both
organizations.

The AAAS decision to end the participation of Science in JSTOR is
in contradiction with your mission and values: to advance science
and serve society. Moreover, I believe that the reasons given for
the decision can be effectively achieved through your continuation
with JSTOR. I hope you and the AAAS Board reconsider the withdrawal
decision.

Please consider this an open letter to you about my concerns. I am
not anxious for our discussion of these important issues to be a
public matter. I am much more interested in a sincere
reconsideration of your decision than a vitriolic public debate. At
the same time, your decision and announcement are public matters,
AAAS is a membership organization, and I believe there are many
individuals who would be concerned about the perspectives I have
suggested in this letter. Beyond those selected individuals copied
below, I want you to be aware that I may be distributing this
letter to other individuals and groups with similar concerns.

Sincerely,


David Carlson, Dean
Library Affairs

cc: Dr. John Koropchak, Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate
Dean, SIU Carbondale
Dr. Alan I. Leshner, Chief Executive Officer, AAAS
Dr. Jay C. Means, Dean, College of Science, SIU Carbondale