NIH-Funded Science Must Now Be Free To Read Instantly (nature.com)
- Reference: 0178241834
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/07/01/0827211/nih-funded-science-must-now-be-free-to-read-instantly
- Source link: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01938-8
> Established under former US president Joe Biden, the policy was originally set to take effect on 31 December for all US agencies, but the administration of Biden's successor, Donald Trump, has accelerated its implementation for the NIH, a move that has surprised some scholars. That's because, although the Trump team has declared itself a defender of taxpayer dollars, it has also targeted programmes and research projects focused on equity and inclusion for elimination. And one of the policy's main goals is to ensure equitable access to federally funded research.
>
> The move means that universities will have less time to advise their researchers on how to comply with the policy, says Peter Suber, director of the Harvard Open Access Project in Cambridge, Massachusetts. There is usually "some confusion or even some non-compliance after a new policy takes effect, but I think universities will eventually get on top of that," he says.
[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01938-8
NIH? (Score:3)
In most countries, NIH is the English abbreviation for " [1]Not Invented Here [wikipedia.org]"
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here
Re: (Score:2)
And your point is?
Is Anyone Deluded About This? (Score:2)
If the Trump people are advancing a Biden initiated policy you can be 100+% certain that is not because they think the policy was beneficial to anyone. There is no "surprise."
Their motivation is to extract revenge for something and to purge anyone they don't like. And make an example out of them. And make sure that only loyalists remain. It has nothing to do with "equity" or making best use of taxpayer dollars.
NIH "offended" Trump in the past so that is the agenda.
Think NIH is the only target?
Re: (Score:2)
This hurts the publishers more than the scientists. Scientists have been various levels of dissatisfied with publishing for a long time, and generally happy to have their research as publicly available as possible. Without an exclusivity period I'm not sure what impact it'll have on independent publishing, so if there's a silver cloud for the snake tallow grifters it might be that it'll starve the publishers some while ensuring legit Science/Cell/etc quality papers go in alongside whatever nonsense RFK fo
Re: (Score:2)
Um, this looks like a policy of instant 'publishing'.
So the for-profit publishers will suffer? And their value proposition was, what? Peer review? We know how valuable that is.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not entirely correct. What I've heard from various universities is that they're not receiving funding. There haven't been official announcements or stop-work orders, the money is just not arriving. It isn't just DEI programs or COVID research or the other known targets, and it isn't only the universities known to be special targets of retribution, like Harvard and Columbia. A lot of money has just stopped flowing since about March.
More accurately (Score:2)
"Starting today, if there were any researchers being funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), then they would be required to make their scientific papers available to read for free as soon as they are published in a peer-reviewed journal."
Simple solution: don't fund anybody, and then nobody is obligated to provide free access.
And yet (Score:2)
People no longer have access to the National Archives, the largest repository of information in the country. Even the Natoinal Archives web site has removed tons of information.
So much for "transparency".
Equal access (Score:2)
Apparently, the new administration redirected the policy to provide "equal" access (which is great) instead of "equitable" access (which is potentially racist and problematic).
Degree Programs in Advanced Commie-Quashing (Score:2)
Shh! You're going to tip off the current administration!