It’s coming to the end of the module, and I feel that I’ve learnt a lot over the past weeks. This topic got me thinking from both sides of the argument, instead of focusing only on one aspect. It also got me reading around a lot more, trying to read from different perspectives that would give me different opinions, much in the same way that my peers’ blogs would too.
Reading Ausaf’s blog, my comment on it highlighted how people could consider different forms of media and which would be beneficial to be a paid subscription or open access. In his post and reply he mentioned how due to his consumption of entertainment was more consistent, he deemed it more suitable to pay a subscription, whereas with educational journal articles they would be used a few times, therefore it wasn’t worth paying for a set subscription.
While my own post dipped slightly into the business side of things, Caiti’s blog provided more of the different ways it could be impacted, one of which was the profits gained by news companies if they weren’t open access. In my comment, I proposed a way in which journals could perhaps emulate the way that different forms of entertainment gain profit; “freeware” such as Spotify and YouTube use advertising to gain some revenue. In her response, she mentioned the “viewing experience” being ruined by ads interrupting midway through. However, with regards to academic articles, it is a lot easier to scroll through ads that are on the screen and thus easier to negate.
The overall conclusion from the blogs that I read seems to be that in terms of education, open access would be beneficial to the majority; being more readily accessible, it would be useful for both educators and students.
(Word Count: 299)