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).
The article is an overview of the shift from "conventional" modes of print publishing characterised by closed-door peer-review process, limited revisions of published work, restricted modes of collaborative authorship towards a more "dynamic" publication workflow and system afforded by digital platforms and tools that allow revisiting of what it means to write and to publish. The article raises questions we should think about when we make these shifts. What does it mean to write academically when the audience is potentially limitless and digital tools could allow comments from beyond academia? How does the text and the logics of collaborating transform when new tools afford archiving revisions and comments by peers and beyond? The article also provides themes to think with while making these shifts: how would quality be assured? what would quality mean? how does it transform the "linear" mode of scientific knowledge production and how would humanities and social science scholarship in particular be affected? how would authors revise and edit texts together and would revisions count as "original" scholarship?
In contrast to traditional printed journals that are closely bound to the medium of paper, static and lacking the ability to be revised over time, the authors seek to depict the potentials of Dynamic Publication Formats and to analyze the necessary prerequisites needed to implement them. The authors argue that dynamic publication formats will enable bodies of text, graphics, and rich media to be changed quickly and easily while still being available to a wide audience.
After tracing the history of Western academic publishing, the authors argue for new ways of disseminating academic research, including mediums that are dynamic and collaborative. This type of dissemination would place more focus on the process and open endedness of academic findings and publishing.