Pop-science is currently no topic to overlook on social media. Websites or social media groups sharing factoids or infographics amass millions of likes and receive a high number of content re-shares. In parallel, pop-science magazines also attract many readers and have a strong online presence. The scientific readership routinely recognizes pop-science reporting as inaccurate, misleading, or even outright wrong. Oblivious to most science reporters’ lack of insight laymen may instead wonder: Why does technology not deliver upon the promises made by pop-science?
Topics such as open peer review, open data, and open notebook science are of increasing interest to the scientific community. Many of the concepts behind this new spin on science are rooted in the FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) world and draw credibility from its staggering success. As such, we would refer to the aforementioned set of trends in science as FOS (Free and Open Science).
With so much talk about FOS going on - and even spilling over into high-profile editorials about publication review - it is distressing how little FOS is actually taking place.