Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy is a book by Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Director of Scholarly Communication at the. Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy by Kathleen Fitzpatrick, forthcoming from NYU Press. Kathleen Fitzpatrick. Profile: Director of Scholarly Communication Modern Language Association; Website: ; Email.
|Published (Last):||10 May 2016|
|PDF File Size:||11.32 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.19 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Retrieved 19 March Fitzpatrickk is often assumed that issues with digital preservation are due to the ephemeral quality of digital artifacts. In this rethinking, the press has a future as the knowledge-disseminating organ of the university. With digital publishing, Fiztpatrick envisions a shift in the accepted conception of authorship from a solitary enterprise with a definite endpoint in the creation of the text to one of writing within a community as part of an ongoing process. Copyright c New York University.
She uses MediaCommons as an example of a community-filtered web platform that can function as a site to comment on a draft of scholarly work. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Critics plqnned written positively on Fitzpatrick’s treatment of authorship. So the networked space of blogs can help stave off obsolescence but it is still a reality that most will become obsolete just like many academic books if not just a little bit kathleen.
Contents Comments Activity Comments. The loss of access to digital texts or their fihzpatrick, sometimes due to incompatibility between older media formats and newer platforms, is mistakenly perceived as the loss of digital texts themselves.
Project MUSE – Planned Obsolescence
Contents Comments Activity Table of Contents. Lastly, Fitzpatrick suggests that these shifting locations and roles of the university press may remove the financial concerns previously restricting their abilities to experiment with new kwthleen of publishing, perhaps allowing presses to explore alternative, more sustainable and open publishing models, including open access publishing. Copyright c New York University. Reviews “At a time of great uncertainty about the future of the humanities, this informed and stimulating book buzzes with excitement for the opportunities that digital technology can offer to humanities researchers Fitzpatrick starts the book by deconstructing one of the most important steps in the academic publication process – peer review.
This text may be distributed in part or in whole on condition that 1 distributed text is not sold, whether or not such sale is “for profit” and 2 distributed fitzaptrick bears this kathlden in full. Another aspect of community or collective authorship that Fitzpatrick explores is related to remix culture.
Exam Copy Please list your name, institutional affiliation, course name and size, and institution address. Fitzpatrick’s exploration of academic peer review has received less favorable criticism. Universities must recognize that their mission is, in addition to the production of knowledge, the communication of knowledge. So the networked space of blogs can help stave off obsolescence but it is still a reality that most will become obsolete just like many academic books if not just a little bit slower.
To support her argument for social solutions, Fitzpatrick examines several successful projects concerned with the development of text markup, metadata, and access standards and practices including TEIDOIand LOCKSS and shows that each is based in the creation of a community organization that values openness and extensibility.
But she goes further, insisting that the key issues that must be addressed are social and kathlfen in origin. Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy. These new interactions may lead to roles for the library, the press, and IT as service units that provide guidance during and add value to the scholarly production process. Included in these practices are three key components: All books by Kathleen Fitzpatrick.
Facing these issues head-on, Kathleen Fitzpatrick focuses on the technological changes—especially greater utilization of internet publication technologies, including digital archives, social networking tools, and multimedia—necessary to allow academic publishing to thrive into the future. She suggests that scholars fitz;atrick a Creative Commons license for scholarly work to facilitate the use and reuse of material for the collective benefit of the community.
Fitzpatrick conceptualizes scholarship as an ongoing conversation between scholars that can only continue if participants have the means to contribute to it. NYU Press will cancel exam copy orders if information cannot be verified.
Planned Obsolescence is a wonderfully clear and honest assessment of the present state of academic publishing and possible future directions.
Houman Barekat in the Los Angeles Review of Books described Fitzpatrick’s reluctance to understand authorship as an effect of technologies and processes of production as “a plsnned antidote to the vulgar technological determinism that characterizes so much of the hype around the digital revolution.
Please list your name, institutional affiliation, course name and size, and institution address. Fitzpatrick points out that this is not entirely correct, illustrating that print text is by no means permanent and digital text is far more permanent than is commonly thought. Respond to the text, but kathlern respond to the other readers.
Retrieved 2 April For this to happen, the press must be integrated within the university and be provided sufficient funding so that its mission is not financially based but, rather, aligns with that of the university. Preservation standards metadata locators access lockss, clockss, portico cost Five: In addition to focusing on the development of preservation practices through community organization, Fitzpatrick argues that creators of digital artifacts fitzaptrick take steps to ensure the compatibility of their work with preservation efforts, stating: Publishing, technology, and the future of the academy.
I think the argument here between ephemerality and apparent immortality of blogs is missing an important point.
Director’s Blog “[A] desire for pre-eminence, authority and disciplinary power — is what blogs and the digital humanities stand against.
Peer Review traditional peer review and its defenses the history of peer review the future of peer review anonymity credentialing the reputation economy community-based filtering mediacommons and peer-to-peer review credentialing, revisited Two: Authorship authorship and technology the rise of the author the death of the author from product to process from individual to collaborative from originality to remix from intellectual property to the gift economy from text to… something more Three: Except as permitted by law, all other uses are prohibited without written permission of the publisher.
Kathleen Fitzpatrick | Planned Obsolescence | MediaCommons Press
For Fitzpatrick, blogshypertextand databases suggest directions in which digital scholarly publishing might move. Listen to an interview with the author on The Critical Lede podcast here. Planned Obsolescence has been reviewed or discussed in a number of publications by a range of writers.
Chapters titled ‘Peer Review,’ ‘Authorship,’ ‘Texts,’ ‘Preservation,’ and ‘The University’ methodically dismantle arguments for the status quo, with sections debating accepted beliefs and practices such as the anonymous basis of fitzpatgick review; recognizable, individual authorship; for-profit university presses; and the rejection of open access as a tenable scholarly publishing model.
Retrieved 16 March