My fellow nerds:
There is actually a question in here, I promise. Treat it like a treasure
hunt or quest.
Anyone that knows me knows how much I despise low level maths. As such,
this is largely anecdotal as usual.
I've been test driving a paid subscription recently. Let's say for the sake
of argument it's 5 letters long and rhymes with "go". I seemed to only get
access to full text articles that lived behind a paywall about 1 in 20 times.
I chalked this up to the weird nature of both my searching style and the
subject niche I find meself in. I mean NLM is really, really cool, right? So
it's not necessarily fair to stack some aggregator up against them, or is it?
So I said to myself "Right, self. Need more data. Join another smarty
listserv."
So I did, and literally not 5 minutes go by when a message comes across
about a lack of access to paid content from the same Massachusetts based
lipstick on the pig provider. (Sorry, content providers provide content,
amirite?) Granted, we *do* know what we're paying for since we get a really
long list of what our subscriptions do and do not include. But how do we know
which kids are playing the content and subscription shell game more often than
others?
I find this curiouser and curiouser. I'm well aware of the commodification
of information. I know that stuff is often there on Sunday and not on Monday.
(Thanks WIPO and greedy people.)
Can anyone please point my groggy butt to a good data visualisation or
nerdy work on how often this game is played? Or perhaps a paper that compares
full text content available in PubMed with the stuff some no good Yankees are
reselling as if it were not just PubMed in a feathered cap a fur coat and a
diamond tipped cane?
Next year's budget will appreciate your input, and if you're ever in the DC
area, a craft beer or other drink of your choice is definitely on me.
Yours,
Brooke
