David Gerard wrote:
The article at
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=60AADF2C-E7F2-9…
goes int a bit more detail. They even note that "Nature" and
"Scientific American" are owned by the same people.
I think that it would be unwise to overeact to what appears to be an act
of desparation. Even the "Washington Post" uses that word in talking
about the matter. If the best slogan they can come up with is "Public
access equals government censorship," which sounds like something out of
"1984," they really are in trouble.
Now that we have Peter Suber on our Advisory Board it will be
interesting to read his comments. It might also be worthwhile to have
an article about Dezenhall if we have someone familiar with the topic.
It strikes me as characteristic of the old way of doing business or
government that to avoid reconsidering one's actions and admitting error
one just hires a PR person to make things right.
Ec