Wolters Kluwer acquires open access publisher : Precursor to blogged content?

I was not familiar with the term open access publishing. But the term struck me when I saw that Wolters Kluwer, a global information services company with a strong presence in legal publishing, had acquired Medknow, one of the largest open access publishers in the world.

Open access publishing sounded a lot like blogs, in which case professionals publish to the Internet and peer review takes place via other blogs, comments on blogs, and other social media.

Reading wikipedia, I discovered open access publishing refers to unrestricted access via the Internet to articles published in scholarly journals. The benefits of open access include opening up access to articles which libraries do not subscribe to and access to information in developing countries, where some universities or medical facilities find it difficult to pay for journal subscriptions.

The language in Wolters Kluwer’s press release regarding locally written content and easier access to content further reminded me of blogs.

The acquisition will broaden Wolters Kluwer Health’s medical research presence in some key markets and help in its efforts to increase locally written content and incorporate more open access platforms into its business model.

For Wolters Kluwer Health customers, the deal means an easier access to medical content in more markets around the world.

From Karen Abramson, president and chief executive officer of Wolters Kluwer Health, Medical Research:

Research is changing in the developing world with clinicians and researchers looking for more access to locally-written content that is peer-reviewed and accessible via open platforms. Our acquisition of Medknow aligns with our strategy of continuing to invest in providing the latest, most trusted information to our customers around the world to help them fuel discoveries and enhance patient care.

When one mentions trusted information coming from professionals in the know about niche subjects, and in particular localized content, I think of blogs. And in the case of the legal profession, law blogs whether published by practicing lawyers, law professors, or other professionals, such as knowledge management or e-discovery professionals.

If you’ve published a blog, you know how peer reviewed a law blog is. One, you’re scared to death of getting something wrong for fear others on the net will quickly expose you. And two, blogged content from good law blogs is discussed and referenced on other law blogs and throughout other social media

Reviewing a list of beneficiaries of open access journals in wikipedia, I saw the same beneficiaries in the case of blogs.

Authors of such articles will see their papers more read, more cited, and better integrated into the structure of science.

Academic readers in general at institutions that cannot afford the journal, or where the journal is out of scope.

Researchers at smaller institutions, where their library cannot afford the journal.

Readers in general, who may be interested in the subject matter.

The general public who will have the opportunity to see what the research is about.

Taxpayers who will see the results of the research they pay for.

Patients and those caring for them, in the case of medical journals, who will be able to keep abreast of medical research.

Medknow, founded in 1997, may be ahead of blogs, but when one of the world’s largest publishers acknowledges the power and value of open access publishing, we’re going to see the day where law blogs will be valued by legal publishers in the same way.

Note: Wolters Kluwer is publishing a few law blogs, including Kluwer Copyright Blog, on which a limited number of scholars serve as authors.