Репозитории открытого доступа: функции и тенденции развития

Open access repositories are an integral part of open science infrastructure that ensures the accessibility and findability of research results. This article is based on the analysis of the various types of repositories. The authors attempted to identify main functions of these platforms, their features and development trends. The sample includes 11 repositories, both institutional and thematic projects, and also general-purpose platforms. The main function of repositories is the storage of publications, although over time the role of these services as the publication priority registrators is increasing. Projects typically feature pre-moderation procedures, as well as a rather careful attitude to the metadata and its accuracy. Only one repository charges publication fee, their revenue come from sponsorship funds, donations, advertising, additional paid services (in various combinations). The possibilities of social interaction as a rule are quite limited: neither reviewing, nor even commenting are built-in functions of the reviewed projects. Collective work on the manuscript is also impossible. The trends of repositories future development are the diversification of formats and types of works exchanged by scientists, as well as the increasing of the importance of non-profit projects for the scientific communication infrastructure.Репозитории открытого доступа – неотъемлемая часть инфраструктуры открытой науки. Они обеспечивают доступность и находимость результатов научных исследований. На основе структурного анализа репозиториев раз- личных типов выделены основные функции данных платформ, их особенности, а также тенденции развития. Выборка включает 11 репозиториев, среди которых как институциональные и тематические проекты, так и платформы широко- го профиля. Основная функция репозиториев – резервное хранение произведений. Со временем возрастает роль этих сервисов как «регистраторов» при- оритета публикации. Все проекты объединяет наличие премодерации, а также довольно внимательное отношение к метаданным и их чистоте. Только один из репозиториев берёт плату за размещение материалов, доходную часть бюджета составляют (в различных комбинациях) спонсорские средства, пожертвования, реклама, дополнительные платные сервисы. Возможности социального взаимодействия достаточно ограничены: ни комментирование, ни тем более рецензирование не являются встроенными функциями рассмотренных проектов. Коллективная работа над рукописью также не предусмотрена. Авторы выделяют такие тенденции развития репозиториев, как увеличение разнообразия форматов и типов произведений, которыми обмениваются учёные, а также повышение значения некоммерческих проектов для инфраструктуры научной коммуникации

A brief history of news making in Russia

In this introductory article to our special issue on newsmaking in Russia, we provide a context for how the study of journalism evolved in Russia in contrast to Europe and the US. This brief historical overview helps make sense of the specific trajectory of journalism studies: from normative Cold War perspectives to a highly diverse and vibrant field that considers journalistic agency, the interplay of commercialisation and media control and the complexities of a rapidly changing media environment. The contributions to this special issue present nuanced approaches to self-censorship, the impact of digital technologies and political intervention

Compliance of New Scientific Platforms with Formal Requirements for Scientific Publications

As a result of the development of the electronic environment, new actors appear in the scientific communication system, including repositories, mega-journals, and open peer review platforms, all of which operate in accordance with the open science paradigm. At the same time, the results of the work of scientists are still being assessed by traditional databases and scientometric services based mostly on the citation counts, which  is often irrelevant for the new projects due to non-compliance with formal criteria of such services. This article discusses the requirements of the Web of Science, Russian Science Citation Index, Scopus, and the Higher Attestation  Commission (VAK) for the sources of scientific information, and analyzes 25 projects for compliance with these requirements. It was revealed that some of the new projects do not meet the criteria due to the lack of traditional markers of the scientific publication. Based on the results obtained, a number of recommendations were formulated that will allow to adjust the requirements to reflect the new realities