One of the problems with Open Access (both the movement and the practice), one that rings alarm bells in certain sectors, is the fact that the term "open" is inextricably linked to neoliberal paradigms.

The written evidence for the BIS Inquiry on Open Access has now been published and is available on the website for the UK parliament. The inquiry follows the past House of Lords inquiry and continues the bitter rivalries and feuds between advocates and detractors. I must say that there is still a great deal of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) in circulation.

A quick heads-up that I'll be speaking at the University of Sussex next week, my Ph.D. alma mater, on the "Future of Peer Review", alongside Maria Kowalczuk from BioMed Central. Taking place in the Sussex Research Hive on the 14th March 2013 at noon, we're hoping to explore the problems of the current model and the ways in which we can salvage what works while fixing the extant troubles.

March 2013 marks ten years since the start of the attack on Iraq. This controversial military action divided opinion in Britain and around the world, and its aftereffects have profoundly shaped politics and the media in Britain in the decade since. What was the conflict's cultural impact?

Martin Paul Eve, ‘Thomas Pynchon, David Foster Wallace and the Problems of “Metamodernism”: Post-Millennial Post-Postmodernism?’, C21 Literature: Journal of 21st-century Writings, 1 (2012), pp. 7-25. Available online at C21 Literature. You can download 50% of the article for free, as per the licensing conditions of Gylphi.

Co-presented with Dr. Caroline Edwards: "Floats Like a Butterfly, Stings Like a Finch: Adorno, Utopia and Open Access Publishing", Lincoln University , 21st-Century Research Group, Weds 27th Feb 4.15-5.30, MC0024 This paper addresses the specific threats faced by the recent Finch Report and will be a practical introduction to the future problems that will occur from the way in which Open Access is being implemented.

There's a Q&A with me that has just been published in Library Journal on why we need a public library of the humanities and social sciences (a "PLOS-like" project -- but not officially affiliated). Meanwhile the project continues to make progress; we're currently building up the various committees and the infrastructure that is needed for these groups to communicate!

Just to share my response to a comment on the PLOHSS project from somebody who claimed that: Any form of APC was unacceptable All APCs would be viewed as vanity publication Me: I think the "vanity publishing" argument is totally fallacious; it's clear that the review process would be completed utterly independently well before any consideration of finance would be made.

An email that I just sent out to people who have expressed an interest. If you'd like to know more, visit http://www.plohss.org or email me with "PLOHSS" in the topic. Dear all, First of all, I must express my sincere gratitude to everybody who responded to my call; the enthusiasm so far has been overwhelming and humbling, so my thanks for that.

For quite some time, I have been interested in/incensed by the scholarly publication system; the exclusions, iniquities and absurdities of it can be clearly seen from only a brief survey of the economic field. I have watched with despair as the sciences have made projects work while the humanities and social sciences have almost sleepwalked into a disaster.

Ron Charles has tweeted that a new Pynchon novel will be published by Penguin in Fall 2013. Entitled Bleeding Edge the work will not quite be out in time for International Pynchon Week 2013, but... wow. Charles stated that two Penguin employees had confirmed the news to him and there's already a piece up about it at The Huffington Post. Let the PYNCHON-L speculation begin!