Comments on: Stumped by AnthroSource

By: Our Circulatory System (or Folklore Studies Publishing in the Era of Open Access, Corporate Enclosure and the Transformation of Scholarly Societies) « Jason Baird Jackson

Fri, 28 May 2010 03:47:32 +0000

[...] AAA still has not fully examined. [For background and discussion, see: AAA 2007; Blackwell 2007; Friedman 2009; Golub 2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b; Jaschik 2007; Kelty 2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b, 2009, [...]

Report this comment

By: The First Open Access Anthropology Day

The First Open Access Anthropology Day — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:26:55 +0000

[...] Stumped by AnthroSource by Kerim [...]

Report this comment

By: Kerim

Kerim — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:55:44 +0000

Glad to hear some people are able to access the article. I am still unable to do so via anthrosource, the Wiley InterScience website or any other means…

Report this comment

By: John McCreery

John McCreery — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:23:00 +0000

Responding to the content of the blog that Kerim was reading: Allow me to recommend Yochai Benkler (2006) _The Wealth of Networks_. Benkler argues persuasively that both anthropologists and economists have erred in assuming that market economies replace economies of the gift (those based, we would say, on generalized reciprocity). He points out that social production, based on the gift, is pervasive in all societies, including those ideologically dominated by market principles. If you don’t believe him, he says, try leaving fifty dollars on the table the next time a friend invites you to dinner and see if you get invited to dinner again; ditto after making love with your wife. Imagine three lawyers writing an opinion: One writes on behalf of a client and is handsomely paid. Another is a judge; if she accepts money, her opinion is corrupt and void. A third is a legal scholar who publishes the opinion in an academic journal. In this betwixt-and-between case, material reward is delayed but accepted with pleasure if it takes the form of grants or prizes. If, Benkler says, we admit what common sense shows us, that social as well as purely economic rewards shape economic behavior, we have no need to assume that the social and economic are radically different worlds. Organizations demand clear role definitions. Markets demand crisply defined pricing, so that transactions will clear. Both flourish when there is a need to amass and produce large amounts of capital. Social production occurs when individuals have small surpluses of time or other resources and the social rewards of the gift outweigh the meager economic rewards of calculating an economic return.

This is, of course, only my summary, and I may have misrepresented Benkler. That said, this is the most impressive piece of social theory I have read in years.

Report this comment

By: John McCreery

John McCreery — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:46:41 +0000

Just tried it. Had to go through a few hoops since my membership is linked to an older email address. But once I got that sorted out, I had no trouble accessing the PDF.

Report this comment

By: Kate G.

Kate G. — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 00:11:49 +0000

I’ve had unending problems with accessing not just AN, but also (randomly) a host of other AAA publications via AnthroSource.
For instance, they used to send out TOC notices for journals with hyperlinks. All took me to a similar “you’re not a member” page. When working at Chicago State University, I was often unable to access articles via AnthroSource when using my office computer, despite being a dues-paying member. I guess it’s because Chicago State couldn’t afford AnthroSource (or JStor, for that matter).
Again, wherever or however you found the citation, the only solution is to into the aaanet site, log in, go to AnthroSource, and then search for the article again. And we all now how poor a search service AnthroSource has.
I’ve written AAA countless times about this and never gotten a satisfactory answer.
thanks for the opportunity to rant.

Report this comment

By: L.L. Wynn

L.L. Wynn — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 04:52:21 +0000

Yeah I looked into this recently and found that you can only access AN if you individually subscribe; I think you can get AN content through a subscribing library but only after it is embargoed for 6 or 12 months. It’s completely ridiculous. If you care at all about open source, you should NOT publish anything in AN.

Report this comment

By: Phil Stephens

Phil Stephens — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:43:30 +0000

You all might take a look at what a group of geographers are doing to address this techno-lock-in/out.
http://www.hugeog.com/

Report this comment

By: Rex

Rex — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:55:52 +0000

The really sad thing is that there has been agreement within the AAA for at least the past 4 years that AN should be the one publication which goes OA… unless they’ve changed their mind, that is.

But realistically, why go with AnthroSource at all anymore? I find it much easier to work with the Wiley-Blackwell site, which is where AAA content now _really_ resides. Its not that surprising that AnthroSource should break so regularly, since it is in fact just a figleaf. I bet in 3 years it’ll disappear altogther.

Report this comment

By: Derick

Derick — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:18:40 +0000

Funny I was just writing AAA to complain about this. The contact person at AAA is Dion Dears at ddears {at} aaanet(.)org if others want to follow-up. I was able to get access to the piece I was looking for (a PoLAR article, not AN) by logging in then running my search anew and browsing to the result. But this is nowhere documented on the site.

I have also requested that they bring back BibTeX citation downloading – whether or not you use BibTeX I think it’s worth encouraging open source formats.

Report this comment

By: morgan

morgan — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:13:40 +0000

Also, as a non-American anthropologist who pays membership fees to my OWN association…this is pretty ridiculous. AN is supposed to be publicly available and readable to a general anthropological audience: yet it’s more locked down that any other publication? It should be free to anyone.

“AN promotes the discipline of anthropology and the interests of anthropologists across all subfields and acts as a forum for anthropologists to communicate with one another.” Or not!

Report this comment

By: James Holland Jones

James Holland Jones — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:08:04 +0000

It’s funny you should raise this issue. When I wrote the post, I was dubious about linking to AnthroSource so I tested it a couple times before publishing the note. Now when I try to follow the link, I get the screen that you complain about. Lame.

For al the high-minded rhetoric of inclusiveness that AAA (and most practicing anthropologists) espouse, I find AAA, and Anthropology as a discipline, to be remarkably hierarchical and way too concerned with technologies of control.

Report this comment

By: Dan Reboussin

Dan Reboussin — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:06:15 +0000

I’m our university’s Anthro librarian (and AAA member) and this has always been an ongoing frustration for me…why isn’t AN included in our subscription? In the old system I could see AN articles by sneaking through the table of contents backdoor but that seems fixed now…

Report this comment

By: ryan a

ryan a — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:25:04 +0000

Seems like AN would be a good way to do a little public outreach, for sure. Why not make it available for free? It makes no sense to restrict it to members only. Maybe we should all comment about this on the AAA blog…

Report this comment

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:13:37 +0000

I have found this recently, also. It seems Anthropology News is the only part of AAA’s output that is completely restricted unless you are a member. It is even restricted from Wiley Interscience, as far as I can tell. Similarly I found it particularly frustrating, since I would expect AN to be one publication you would actively want to make freely accessible. Would be grateful to hear if there is any way to access it that I have missed.

Report this comment