The following statement is key to the whole New York Times article and to the debate over opening up the peer review process:
…the goal is not necessarily to replace peer review but to use other, more open methods as well.
In opposition to this perspective is the traditional notion that evaluating originality and intellectual significance can be done only by experts in a field.
Yet academics like Mr. Cohen who regularly posts his work online are finding the exact opposite:
Engaging people in different disciplines and from outside academia has made his scholarship better.
This video uses the same methodology as the Lost Generation video to demonstrate that the content or substance of both sides of an argument are often identical. How we view, or more importantly, what perspective we view an argument will determine whether it is negative or positive.
Whether you are for or against the Google Book Deal, this latest rejection by the US Justice Department raises some significant doubts.
Related articles by Zemanta