Vol. 2 no. 1 (Spring/Summer 2006)

Open Access and the Changing World of Academic Journals

An Interview with Peter Suber

By Steve Shaddock | comments |

Seeking to expand and explore the intellectual and creative foundations of journals like NeoAmericanist, Executive Editor Steve Shaddock recently contacted and interviewed Open Access advocate Peter Suber.  Dr. Suber is the Open Access Project Director at Public Knowledge, a public-interest advocacy group in Washington D.C. focusing on information policy.  He's also a Research Professor of Philosophy at Earlham College and Senior Researcher at the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC).  He has a Ph.D. in philosophy and a J.D. from Northwestern University. He is the author of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter and editor of the Open Access News weblog.  He was the principal drafter of the Budapest Open Access Initiative, and sits on the Steering Committee of the Scientific Information Working Group of the U.N. World Summit on the Information Society, the Publishing Working Group of Science Commons, the Advisory Board of American Library association Information Commons, and the Board of Governors of the International Consortium for the Advancement of Academic Publishing. Lingua Franca magazine named him one of "Academia's 20 Most Wired Faculty" in 1999.  He has been active in promoting open access for many years through his research, speaking, and writing. 

Read the full paper...

On Shaky Ground

The Precarious Arguments of Thomas Prince and John Winthrop Over Earthquakes, Lightning Rods, and God

By Gwen Hochman | comments |

In the aftermath of the 1755 New England earthquake, preacher Thomas Prince and professor John Winthrop engaged in a four-month public dispute about the causes of earthquakes and the effectiveness of lightening rods.  Historians have traditionally characterized their disagreement as battle between science and religion, but this paper traces the conflict instead to a fundamental difference in the two men’s personal theologies.  Prince’s conception of a wrathful god and Winthrop’s belief in a more benevolent deity generated the contrasting visions for public welfare evident in their sermons, lectures, and newspaper submissions.

For full citations please see attached pdf

Watchdog on a Leash

Colin Powell’s UN-presentation on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and the coverage of The Washington Post and The New York Times in February, 2003. [1]

 

By Marianne Ingleby | comments |

Media coverage of alleged security threats in the run-up to the US-led Iraq war has recently come under scrutiny: some suggest that journalists failed to critically assess and independently evaluate claims made by the Bush government in attempts to legitimize the invasion. By looking specifically at the print media’s handling of Colin Powell’s presentation to the UN Security Council in February of 2003, in which he offered ‘evidence’ of weapons of mass destruction and other possible breaches of disarmament obligations, the author argues that major newspapers were hesitant to publish articles that called into question the legitimacy of the presentation. In relegating skepticism and critique to less prominent articles and sections than those communicating official government opinions, the newspapers acted as a ‘mouthpiece’ for the Bush government, a sentiment echoed in their own public apology, issued months later. In this article, Marianne Ingleby explores the idea that the unquestioning presentation of Powell’s report was due to more than simply a structural bias arguably built into the institution of journalism—she suggests that, upon closer inspection, newspapers were generally reluctant to voice criticism in prominent places, such as the front page, headlines, streamers, and sub-headings. As a result, she argues, the American public may have been misinformed, and more inclined to accept government claims at face value.

For full citations please see attached pdf

Constructing an Image

Pregnant Women, Crack Cocaine, and the Media in American History

By Holly Karibo | comments |

In Constructing an Image Holly Karibo traces the development of the mythology of the ‘crack mother’ in mainstream American media during the 1980s.  The author demonstrates how implications of race, class, and gender in the popular press furthered the systematic marginalization of minority women, and particularly, African American single mothers, effectively reinforcing the burgeoning conservative and patriarchal ideologies being espoused by the New Right.  Through a comprehensive analysis of the decade’s print media, Karibo argues that the racial targeting of the ‘crack scare’ served to strengthen both the concept of the middle-class, nuclear family, and the notion of a ‘normal,’ female, maternal instinct.  Thus, the author concludes, the ‘crack scare’ which emerged in American society at the close of the twentieth century is demonstrative of the ways in which media representations have been instrumental in constructing particular social categories, which in turn, serve to further legitimize the hegemonic power structure that inform American society.

For full citations please see attached pdf

On Shaky Ground: Thomas Prince and John Winthrop on Earthquakes, Lightning Rods, and God

By Gwen Hochman | comments |

In the aftermath of the 1755 New England earthquake, preacher Thomas Prince and professor John Winthrop engaged in a four-month public dispute about the causes of earthquakes and the effectiveness of lightening rods. Historians have traditionally characterized their disagreement as battle between science and religion, but this paper traces the conflict instead to a fundamental difference in the two men’s personal theologies. Prince’s conception of a wrathful god and Winthrop’s belief in a more benevolent deity generated the contrasting visions for public welfare evident in their sermons, lectures, and newspaper submissions.

Read the full paper...