One of the examples discussed is the use of social networking sites as a model for knowledge creation and dissemination. They discuss the affordances of platforms like facebook such as selecting the circles of audiences for different posts and the ability to receive social and instant feedback on ideas. They explore the possibility of having SNS for scientists specifically, along the lines of Academia.edu or Researchgate where scholars can post their work and the use of question functionality can generate wide discussions. They also discuss the example of Wikipedia. One of the important ways in which the wikipedia model is helpful is that anyone can contribute to a topic and that authorship can also be given to specific parts of a contribution. With the benefit of hindsight, these examples raises questions of what it means when the digital tools for collaborative authorship and publication are often owned by companies with their own policies around monetizing data and privacy clauses, and what categories of analysis should we use to analyze the affordances of these platforms in the present?
The authors argued that we need to rethink traditional modes of academic knowledge production and dissemination. They review the linear models through which knowledge dissemination happens in formats like academic journals. In these formats, scholars send the finished products of their work through closed-door peer review processes, where revisions that happen are not transparent to readers and revisions based on public feedback is very limited. The authors delineate several formats- from pre-print repositories, blogs to social networks, as ways to make knowledge production more dynamic. Dynamic publishing according to them is geared towards making the process of knowledge creation open or transparent, continuously able to revise and edit content, and open to multiple authorial contributions (among other goals).