Jackson 🫂

Who are you shadowboxing here?

I admit after reading it again, I was attributing a dog whistle that I don’t see now. Sorry.

You don’t get paid for your research papers being published, it’s required in may fields but it isn’t something you get paid for. Stipends are not money to live off, in most cases you barely get by. So no, money is not supporting those efforts, it’s literally corporations taking the labor of researchers and making money off it.

This seems a bit stretched.

I had to refresh my memory on the terms, but it’s basically scholarly output expectations. For many professors, it’s a requirement of their employment. I fail to see how one could say they aren’t paid for publishing works when it’s a requirement of their employment.

As for students doing research as part of their graduate studies and publishing their work, the stipend may not cover the CoL, but it’s meant to help them get by while they do their research and publish papers. Money to enable their work.

Do they need to get paid on a per paper basis they can prosper on for you to count that?

Either way, all I’m doing is trotting in on my horse trying to white knight for journalists and journalistic orgs trying to survive under capitalism.

But, yeah, equal access to quality information, journalism, data, internet, electricity, clean water, safe roads, housing, food, education, therapy, etc. for everyone should be what we’re working toward. However, that isn’t where we’re at as a society right now. In the meantime, for those of us with the means, supporting journalism we find useful is a wise move.

Enjoy your weekend. Live long and prosper!

We especially see this with academic publishing and the people writing those papers aren’t even paid for it usually.

I’m not in academia, but I’m pretty sure research papers are usually part of the job for many professors, and they are paid for those jobs. Research students get stipends (money) to live off of while doing research and publishing their work. So, money is supporting those efforts as well, right?

I’m not in support of having to pay for quality information being the way, but it is the way right now. There are people that refuse to pay for journalism, some saying because it restricts access to quality information to those that can’t afford it, but I posit boycotting paying for journalism is having a net negative effect on quality information getting into anyone’s hands, including those that don’t have the means to pay for it.

This is a systemic issue. Attacking the symptom isn’t helping. It’s just killing journalism as a whole.

Sounds like an impractical philosophy to me.

Focusing on the information we want, presented at the standard we expect, do you think we’re supposed to get all of that from hobbyists and volunteers? In our current, prevailing economic system, gathering and presenting information (reporting) takes time and effort. Entities that put their time and effort into the task, are going to need financial support. Everybody’s gotta eat.

In our present paradigm, if journalism is not supported financially, quality information would be less available. We already have to sift through a ton of bullshit on the web. Nobody paying for quality will drop the overall quality further. The emotional appeal for the less fortunate doesn’t change that.

I’m not trying to antagonize, but I wholeheartedly disagree with your sentiment. Though it would be ideal; it’s not realistic at the moment. I do hope we get there.

Testers needed for the feedback form as well.

It’s usually Slack for me.

Teams was a factor in leaving my last job. It was a small factor, but a factor nevertheless.