Author: Publishing Manager

Is the Price of Musical Ambition Too High?

Is the Price of Musical Ambition Too High?

It is often assumed that creative people are prone to psychological instability, and that this explains apparent associations between cultural production and mental health problems. Sally Anne Gross and George Musgrave in their book CAN MUSIC MAKE YOU SICK? turn this view on its head. By listening to how musicians understand and experience their working lives, they show that whilst making music is therapeutic, making a career from music can be traumatic.

Listen to Sally Anne Gross discuss the authors’ findings on Robert Elms BBC Radio London, 11.00 Saturday 26th. Jason Solomons stands in.

ADVERTISING FOR THE HUMAN GOOD – new WPCC issue published

ADVERTISING FOR THE HUMAN GOOD – new WPCC issue published

Twelve new articles feature in 15:2 ADVERTISING FOR THE HUMAN GOOD, WPCC’s latest issue edited by Carl Jones, University of Westminster, UK at westminsterpapers.org/37/volume/15/issue/2.

Matching corporate social responsibility ideals and reflecting the social concerns of millennial consumers and audiences is becoming increasingly important for brands and even governments. Whilst existing publications in academic and professional literature raise concerns over the links between capitalist consumerism and advertising, articles in this issue highlight different examples of practice or approach that have the potential to motivate progressive behaviours in various cultures. These include ambient advertising, neuroscience, brands’ cause donations, decolonisation and social modelling on the one hand, and anti-racism, recycling, sustainable tourism and choice of advertising talent, on the other. This issue observes how the evolved practice of advertising can work within different ideologies, with the objective of generating advertising for the human good but also how change may need to come from within advertising and society generally as attitudes change over time.

ISSUE CONTENTS

Advertising and the Way Forward
Carl W. Jones

Social Advertising and Social Change: Campaigns about Racism in Latin America and Mexico
Fabiola Fernández Guerra

Understanding Authenticity in Digital Cause-Related Advertising: Does Cause Involvement Moderate Intention to Purchase?
Wilson Ndasi,  Ediz Edip Akcay

Complicated Green Advertising: Understanding the Promotion of Clothing Recycling Efforts
Myles Ethan Lascity,  Maryann R. Cairns

Changing Masculinity, One Ad at a Time
Gry Høngsmark Knudsen,  Lars Pynt Andersen

Where Public Interest, Virtue Ethics and Pragmatic Sociology Meet: Modelling a Socially Progressive Approach for Communication
Jane Johnston

How Ambient Advertising is Uniquely Placed to Make Audiences Think
Miriam Sorrentino

Colourism in Commercial and Governmental Advertising in Mexico: ‘International Latino’, Racism and Ethics
Juris Tipa

Changing Perceptions, Changing Lives – Promoting Intercultural Competence and Ethical Creativity through Advertising
Birgit Breninger,  Thomas Kaltenbacher

The World According to Dave Trott: An Interview
Carl W. Jones

Teaching Advertising for the Public Good
Rutherford,  Fiona Cownie

The Palau Legacy Pledge: A Case Study of Advertising, Tourism, and the Protection of the Environment
Ismael Lopez Medel

westminsterpapers.org
WPCC is published by the University of Westminster Press for CAMRI, University of Westminster.

‘Active Travel Studies’ journal open for submissions.

‘Active Travel Studies’ journal open for submissions.

Active Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal launched today for submissions a venture based at the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Academy. Editors Tom Cohen and Rachel Aldred here discuss the thinking behind the journal and outline below the range of published material to be expected and context of current debates on active travel in 2020.

Active Travel Studies will provide researchers with a natural home for new findings on all aspects of active travel, including but not limited to walking and cycling. As an open-access journal, charging no fees to either authors or readers, it will reduce barriers between those who are producing knowledge on active travel and those who wish to benefit from it.

‘We’re very excited about the journal,’ explains its editor, Dr Tom Cohen. ‘It marks an opportunity for research on active travel to reach a wider audience and to do so without the delay common in academic publishing. The journal will welcome a range of submissions (debates, reviews and interviews, as well as more familiar research articles) and we plan to allow multi-media output as well as more conventional formats.’

‘Another way in which we hope to differ from many journals is in remaining approachable – we welcome the opportunity to discuss with authors their ideas concerning possible submissions. But this will not be at the expense of academic rigour: all submissions will be subject to peer review.’

The journal is launching at what may be an auspicious time, as COVID-19 has provoked both a sharp increase in active travel and heated debate about whether and how that increase can be made permanent. As Cohen puts it, ‘our hope is that the journal can provide sound evidence to inform both this policy transition and others in the future.’

About the Journal

Active Travel Studies is a new, peer-reviewed, open-access journal intended to provide a source of authoritative research on walking, cycling and other forms of active travel. In the context of a climate emergency, widespread health problems associated with inactivity, and poor air quality caused in large part by fossil-fuel transport, the journal is relevant and timely. It will perform the critical function of providing practitioners and policy makers with access to current and robust findings on all subjects relevant to active travel.

We live in times of climate crisis, with illegal levels of air pollution in many cities worldwide, and what has been called an epidemic of physical inactivity. Technological change alone will not solve such problems: we also need major growth in active travel (primarily walking and cycling, but also other active and semi-active types of travel, such as scooters) to replace many shorter car trips. Active modes could even (e.g. through electric assist trikes) help make urban freight much more sustainable. Journals within many fields cover active travel, but literature remains highly segmented and (despite high levels of policy interest) difficult for practitioners to find. Established, mainstream journals are not open access, another barrier to policy transfer and knowledge exchange. Thus, while many towns, cities, and countries seek to increase active travel, the knowledge base suffers from a lack of high-quality academic evidence that is easy to find and obtain. This reinforces practitioner reliance on often lower-quality grey literature, and a culture of relying on ad hoc case studies in policy and practice. This journal provides a bridge between academia and practice, based on high academic standards and accessibility to practitioners. Its remit is to share knowledge from any academic discipline/s (from bioscience to anthropology) that can help build knowledge to support active travel and help remove barriers to it, such as car dependency. Within this normative orientation, it is rigorously academic and critical, for instance not shying away from analysing examples where interventions do not lead to more active travel. It goes beyond immediate policy imperatives to share knowledge that while not immediately change-oriented can contribute to a deeper understanding of, for instance, why people drive rather than walk. As well as publishing relevant new research, the journal commissions both commentary pieces on such research, and critical reviews of the existing literature. Reflecting the diversity of its audience, its content is varied, including written work of different lengths as well as audio-visual material.

For more information on submissions see the journal page ‘About’ and drop down menu for information on editorial team, editorial policies and submissions.

Supporting Open Access Monographs: Ingredients for a Prototype?

Supporting Open Access Monographs: Ingredients for a Prototype?

With the UKRI consultation on Open Access deadline imminent UWP’s Press Manager, Andrew Lockett wonders out loud what kind of additional pilot project to further encourage OA monographs might be worth considering. 

Calls to support public publishing infrastructure, ‘new’ ‘business’ models and alternative approaches to monograph publishing are popular. With the work of COPIM progressing well and building on established ventures like the Scholar-Led consortium, OBP and OLH (in journals) here are some thoughts about what a ambitious pilot scheme could look like. Caveats abound. Agreement between parties, governance and practicalities would be difficult in context. But could it be useful to think of values in the sector and consider the merits of a carrot- rather than stick-based approach? 

I have called it COUL after a long search for an upbeat acronym. 

Collective Open University Library – ­UK (Monographs Publishing)

Participating members based in UK universities should agree to match or add to new funding from UKRI/RLUK. The scheme should be based on a mixture of the best elements of the US TOME scheme (see https://www.openmonographs.org) which is a venture organised between the Association of American Universities (AAU), Association of Research Libraries (ARL), and Association of University Presses (AUPresses) and the Lever Press idea: https://www.leverpress.org. The latter is a useful warning of dangers inherent. The premise is a good one but its outcomes in terms of published outputs have been modest in number, considering. For the scheme to work to optimum levels, experienced publishers should be paired with librarian experts and publishing-orientated academics to work towards lean governance and structures, each of whom should already be aware of the standpoint of the others and not just be ‘batting’ for their side. All three expertise groups being fully engaged in the project design would be vital for success. 

The basis of the scheme would be to encourage the following three elements:

I) Non-profit low cost monograph publishing at a local and small scale level that could be undertaken by any participating members.

II) Dissemination of open access monographs and awareness raising within the members.

III) The scheme would financially support publishing at those institutions that produce monographs working with a rubric that rewards activity in several ways:

  • based on the numbers of titles published to a maximum of 10 titles per imprint in the first instance but expand thereafter
  • based on the success in reaching audiences in views and downloads and other relevant metrics that may be developed 
  • recognise publications that go beyond tick-box equality, diversion and inclusion and demonstrate progressive orientation in the research or publication procedures, whether that be student co-creation, commons orientation, ethics aware citation practice, a focus on human well-being, and communications or impact strategy or outcomes that truly serve to educate
  • as the above implies the scheme should include a small element of research-into-teaching titles that focus on the communication of new research to undergraduate and graduate students in this author’s belief that bridges need to be built between research and teaching in scholarly communications that are being lost under current REF orientations

As a result a proportion of funding say 70% would be up-front based on submission. With 30% to follow reflecting delivery so that stronger projects are incentivised. The funding should be competitive (but not too competitive as to be greed-inducing) and be expressed over a period of a minimum of 5 years with the expectation that it could and would be renewed. I would recommend funding in the region of up to a maximum (depending on project scope) of£6000 per monograph to start with;£2500 for retrospective recognition. The idea would not to be to cover entirety of all costs of a publication in form of a ‘pure’ subsidy (though these sums can be sufficient) but to get publishing initiatives off the starting blocks with ‘seed and support funding’ on the basis of lists of titles not individual books. This weighting would bake in a degree of realism and discourage support of too long, ill-considered, very marginal publications that OA should not be considered the answer for – i.e. The ‘vanity’ publication or the ‘impractical’ monograph. Experimental publishing should be approached separately and via separate means: the ‘vanilla monograph’ hugely valuable as it is, poses enough challenges.  

The funding allocations would be agnostic about where it would be directed (to allow for local circumstances but also efficiency of existing providers). It would not include funding elements for research but would permit:

  1. Publication by traditional and new university presses
  2. Spending on publishing services by cost-effective third party private providers 
  3. Spend on in-house resources for the projects 
  4. Use of self-publishing services in conjunction with any of the above
  5. Non-intrusive monitoring of readership patterns of monographs funded for research purposes

The following priorities should be kept in mind:

  1. Encouragement of low-cost monograph production at all suitable sites with UK university libraries and those they work with or via scholarly associations and scholar-led groups. 
  2. High standards made visible, transparent, flexible but consistent. These should not necessarily just be concerned with technical or workflow orientated but also about the practice of wider ethics and community-building and based around ideas of a knowledge commons and aimed at the reduction of existing inequalities in the system across the university sector being considered a priority. 
  3. Raising of awareness of scholarly communications within specific academic communities as a prime objective of the scheme: those benefiting from funding could work with Jisc (perhaps?) on publication and marketing of specific tool kits to libraries and specific academic groups explaining merits to individuals and groups of publishing this way. 
  4. Directed support as a priority to humanities and social sciences and those STEM topics that do not receive grant support from funders. 
  5. Encouragement of publishers or groups who publish well, who use the opportunities afforded by open access and the internet proactively and not just to shore up existing workflows, sunk costs and unexamined overheads; operations that seek to keep costs and prices low with mission based motives and who do not seek to trade on exclusivity, elitism, ring-fencing and prestige; the scheme should look to encourage established operations willing to look at a different future as well as the new kids on the block.

The aim should be to create a vehicle with long term potential that learns from a variety of experiences and adjusts accordingly and build momentum over years. The starting point I would suggest might be 100-200 titles could be supported using collective subscription mechanisms similar to or building on those/working with those established by Open Book Publishers, Knowledge Unlatched (in its early days), Jisc, Open Library of Humanities or in the future by the COPIM project. It is important not to proliferate too many schemes rather focus on a maximum of 2-3 that could seriously and reliably build capacity. Perhaps one has to take the view in the light of the complexity and actors involved there is the risk ‘the perfect could be the enemy of the good’. But a bigger risk is that the ‘timid is the enemy of any improvement’ and might lead to further decades of OA monograph trench warfare, unintended consequences and heightened, even dangerous scholarly communications inequalities and resource concentration. The question for myself reconsidering whether COUL is possible, is at once, it is too ambitious or just not nearly ambitious enough?

ANDREW LOCKETT
Press Manager, University of Westminster Press
The views expressed are those of the author only and not the University of Westminster or agreed policy of the University of Westminster Press.

(Image blue sky, facing London)

Anthropocenes journal is live!

UWP is delighted to announce the first articles of the new open access journal Anthropocenes – Human, Inhuman, Posthuman are now published.

ANTHROPOCENES – HUMAN, INHUMAN, POSTHUMAN
Editors-in-Chief
David Chandler (Professor of International Relations, School of Social Sciences, University of Westminster)
Jane Lewis (Principal Shetland College, University of Highlands and Islands)
Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos (Professor of Law and Theory and Director of the Westminster Law & Theory Lab, University of Westminster).

CONTENTS
Research Articles
The Anthropocene Eel: Emergent Knowledge, Ontological Politics and New Propositions for an Age of Extinctions   Casper Bruun Jensen
Constructing Human Versus Non-Human Climate Migration in the Anthropocene: The Case of Migrating Polar Bears in Nunavut, Canada   Julian Reid
Walking with a Ghost River: Unsettling Place in the Anthropocene   Tricia Toso, Kassandra Spooner-Lockyer, Kregg Hetherington

Commentary
Frontier Technologies and Digital Solutions: Digital Ecosystems, Open Data and Wishful Thinking   Jessica McLean

Interventions
Making a Case for an Environmental History of Dunes   Joana Gaspar de Freitas
In Terms of Meaning   Roswitha R. Gerlitz

Visual Essays
The Afterlife of Extraction in the Coal Region: An Exploration into the ‘Land of the Living Dead’   Andrew Long
Floating in Quarantine: Where Colourless Green Ideas Sleep Furiously Luigi Russi, Katarina Rothfjell

Practice
Encouraging Discussion of Science and Technology Futures through Practice-Led Research   Sean Fitzgerald

Interview
Hyperobjects, Hyposubjects and Solidarity in the Anthropocene: Anthropocenes Interview with Timothy Morton and Dominic Boyer   Anthropocenes – Human, Inhuman, Posthuman

Review
Unlearning as Moving Towards Dehumanism and Decolonial Entanglements – Singh, Julietta (2018): Unthinking Mastery: Dehumanism and Decolonial Entanglements. Durham, NC: Duke University Press   Monika Jaeckel

About the Journal
The journal engages our contemporary epoch of the Anthropocene on the basis that its importance goes far beyond the popular and scientific concerns of global warming and climate change. As well as new problems, the Anthropocene offers new opportunities: questioning and disrupting established disciplinary silos and assumptions, calling for innovative, experimental and new interdisciplinary approaches. The choice of title reflects the editors’ understanding of the Anthropocene as a plural concept that is radically transformed when seen from different disciplines, different geographical and social positions, and different ontological categories (human, inhuman, posthuman). Anthropocenes welcomes submissions not so much on the basis of the ‘what’ of the topic covered but rather the ‘how’. The journal’s core readership fields are the social sciences, arts and humanities (broadly construed), although often social and political thought will also be applied to aspects of the natural or ‘hard’ sciences. We are interested in the creative, disruptive and transformative potentials of thought and practices in the Anthropocene.

E- ISSN 2633-4321 https://www.anthropocenes.net

Anthropocenes – Human, Inhuman, Posthuman is published by the University of Westminster Press.