阅读***这个*!垃圾邮件对开放科学的威胁

IF 4.5 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION New Media & Society Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1177/14614448241248655
Johanna Cohoon
{"title":"阅读***这个*!垃圾邮件对开放科学的威胁","authors":"Johanna Cohoon","doi":"10.1177/14614448241248655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on multiple sources of qualitative data, I describe a case of open science infrastructure (OSI) abuse. The case illustrates how developers navigated scholarly value tensions and issues of epistemic and platform legitimacy while battling spam on their open science webapp. Notably, their struggle used precious financial resources and drew attention away from other development tasks like feature expansion. This research makes evident that not only is OSI abuse like spam a financial burden, but it puts scholarly information security—specifically, the legitimacy of open science content—at risk. However, protecting against such abuse is not a trivial matter; it raises questions of who is responsible for defining and enforcing scholarly values. The urgency of this issue is magnified by OSI’s relationship to public trust in science.","PeriodicalId":19149,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"*READ**THIS*!! Spam as a threat for open science\",\"authors\":\"Johanna Cohoon\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14614448241248655\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Drawing on multiple sources of qualitative data, I describe a case of open science infrastructure (OSI) abuse. The case illustrates how developers navigated scholarly value tensions and issues of epistemic and platform legitimacy while battling spam on their open science webapp. Notably, their struggle used precious financial resources and drew attention away from other development tasks like feature expansion. This research makes evident that not only is OSI abuse like spam a financial burden, but it puts scholarly information security—specifically, the legitimacy of open science content—at risk. However, protecting against such abuse is not a trivial matter; it raises questions of who is responsible for defining and enforcing scholarly values. The urgency of this issue is magnified by OSI’s relationship to public trust in science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Media & Society\",\"volume\":\"115 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Media & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241248655\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241248655","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我利用多种定性数据来源,描述了一个滥用开放科学基础设施(OSI)的案例。该案例说明了开发人员如何在与开放科学网络应用程序上的垃圾邮件作斗争的同时,处理学术价值紧张关系以及认识论和平台合法性问题。值得注意的是,他们的斗争耗费了宝贵的财政资源,并将注意力从功能扩展等其他开发任务上转移开来。这项研究表明,滥用开放源码软件(如垃圾邮件)不仅会造成经济负担,还会危及学术信息安全,特别是开放科学内容的合法性。然而,防止此类滥用并非小事一桩;它提出了由谁来定义和执行学术价值观的问题。由于开放科学研究所与公众对科学的信任之间的关系,这个问题的紧迫性被放大了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
*READ**THIS*!! Spam as a threat for open science
Drawing on multiple sources of qualitative data, I describe a case of open science infrastructure (OSI) abuse. The case illustrates how developers navigated scholarly value tensions and issues of epistemic and platform legitimacy while battling spam on their open science webapp. Notably, their struggle used precious financial resources and drew attention away from other development tasks like feature expansion. This research makes evident that not only is OSI abuse like spam a financial burden, but it puts scholarly information security—specifically, the legitimacy of open science content—at risk. However, protecting against such abuse is not a trivial matter; it raises questions of who is responsible for defining and enforcing scholarly values. The urgency of this issue is magnified by OSI’s relationship to public trust in science.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Media & Society
New Media & Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
274
期刊介绍: New Media & Society engages in critical discussions of the key issues arising from the scale and speed of new media development, drawing on a wide range of disciplinary perspectives and on both theoretical and empirical research. The journal includes contributions on: -the individual and the social, the cultural and the political dimensions of new media -the global and local dimensions of the relationship between media and social change -contemporary as well as historical developments -the implications and impacts of, as well as the determinants and obstacles to, media change the relationship between theory, policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Child idols in South Korea and beyond: Manufacturing young stars at the intersection of the K-pop and influencer industries The influencer-intellectual tactic and social media advertisements: How PragerU advances partisan knowledge The dual impact of social media on Asian Americans’ racial identity and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic Pathways to persuasion: The impact of social media influencers’ self-disclosure and follower size on persuasion outcomes Hip-hop music producers’ labour in the digital music economy: Self-promotion, social media and platform gatekeeping
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1