In the past ten years a vibrant ecosystem of alternative posting platforms has emerged, often aiming to tackle some of the recognized difficulties with traditional newspapers other than price. These websites can differ out of journals in various ways, from their disciplinary range and publication type for the way they are really funded or governed. They can as well disaggregate newspaper features such as criminal record, editorial variety and expert review or perhaps focus on a wider variety of investigate outcomes.

A primary reason why these kinds of platforms are alternative is the fact they have a different version for engagement in the scholarly system, giving more democratic and wide open modes of socio-technical organisation. They often offer alternatives towards the restrictive models of participation embodied by simply corporate systems and, therefore , are a key element part of the continual dialogue around ways to improve online democracy.

However , the term ‘alternative’ risks being seen as small or simply restrictive and the fact that many of those new tools are based on existing code and features means that they may have difficulty fitting into a definition of what is an alternative creating platform. To help with this, over the summer months 2022 Knowledge Exchange started a project that explores what these types of platforms perform and how they may be placed in the wider available scholarly interaction ecosystem. The first step was the syndication of a scoping paper, followed by a set of questions designed to identify and better understand these types of new traders.

This study was provided for a wide variety of organisations, both individuals who self-identified for the reason that alternative publishing systems and other research/scholarly communication stakeholders (including universities, funders and the larger research community). As such, a number of the responses might not fully fit in the ‘alternative’ definition.

The responses towards the questionnaire had been analysed to recognize commonalities and differences in just how these fresh publishing platforms run. The main locating was that most of the platforms that responded thought of themselves for being alternative and that the majority of them had been not-for-profit. Yet , the identifying characteristics for the majority of of these has not been their business or revenue model but rather the academic/institutional beginnings and their emphasis on open get, open source code, and open expert review.

Additional aspects of what precisely makes a platform an alternative were also identified, such as the amount to which they offered a wider disciplinary scope than traditional web publishers, whether they were based about submitted versions/preprints or used open licences and so on. The findings were consolidated and the progress a visualisation prototype set about, together with the generation of any initial taxonomy.

The proliferation of these systems suggests that the with regard to alternatives to dominant social media sites is solid. However , it is vital to avoid complacency. As these substitute platforms expand, they will experience the same issues for the reason that other digital technologies and it is essential that they will continue to make customer service their goal. If they fail to do this, their gain over popular sites will begin to go away.