From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 13:49:44 +0100

… The upshot is that OA must be viewed as a potential quagmire for
universities, for research funders and for politicians. The problem
they face is that it is no longer possible not to respond to the
clamour for OA. Yet the wrong response can end up making matters
worse. It does not help that the abundance of advisers and consultants
willing to offer advice on OA invariably have their own agenda, and
often a vested interest in a particular outcome.

All in all, one is left wondering if there is anyone in the world able
to provide an objective assessment of the current state of play of
scholarly communication and its likely future development, including
OA’s role in that development.

But perhaps there is someone. What about Jack Meadows, Emeritus
Professor of Library and Information Studies at Loughborough
University?

Before retiring in 2001 Meadows was, at different times in his
academic career, a physicist, an astronomer, an information scientist,
and a historian of science. During that time he also ran a number of
different academic departments, and was both a Dean and a Pro-Vice
Chancellor. In addition, he is a Fellow of the Institute of Physics,
and Permanent Vice-President of the Library Association. And we could
mention in passing that he has an asteroid named after him too —
asteroid 4600 Meadows to be precise.

Vitally, Meadows has devoted a great deal of time during his life to
thinking about and researching the history of scholarly communication
…

… although he has observed the development of OA over the years,
Meadows is not an advocate for any specific form of OA. As such, he
has no particular dream to sell, and no horse in the OA race.

More here: http://t.co/QCzlvezy9f

Richard Poynder