Litman's book - Digital Copyright - is BTW available as a free download from the UM Library's institutional repository, Deep Blue.  Have d/l'd and will give it the 'ol read through later this year. 

Infographic by PPC Blog

The National Institutes of Health's Center for Scientific Review (CSR) today released a new video to show new applicants and others how NIH assesses over 80,000 grant applications each year to help find those with the most merit. With the majority of NIH’s $31 billion budget supporting grants to researchers, these assessments help ensure investments lead to significant advances in science and health.

"The video provides an inside look at the dynamic way reviewers evaluate NIH grant applications," said CSR Director Dr. Toni Scarpa. "You'll see the rigor and integrity of their efforts, which have enabled NIH to identify ground-breaking research year after year."

Also take a look at NIH Tips for Applicants.

...at worst the book will pass unnoticed, but friends and acquaintances when they meet me will certainly feel under an obligation to say to me the sort of thing that is always said when an author publishes a book.  I should like to ask them to do nothing of the sort.  No, let them say nothing, because, as a result of all sorts of falsifications, the social situation of the so-called 'artist' in our times has become so pretentious that whatever can be said in such circumstances sounds false, and the more sincerity and simplicity you put into your 'I enjoyed it enormously' or 'I like it very much indeed', the more shameful it is for him and for you.  I therefore beg you to keep silent.  Keep silent in hope of a better future.  For the time being - if you wish to let me know that the book pleased you - when you see me simply touch your right ear.  If you touch your left ear, I shall know that you didn't like it, and if you touch your nose it will mean that you are not sure... thus we shall avoid uncomfortable and even ridiculous situations and understand each other in silence.  My greetings to all.

A nice video on plagiarism, but I wonder how effective these types of scare tactics are in getting students to play by the rules.  I'm also skeptical of plagiarism detection services like Ephorus and Turn-it-in, and am opposed to their use and promotion in higher education.  But - besides that, the video's well-made...

via  Librarians Matter

 (I made the pres in Keynote and unfortunately couldn't get the slides to display in the conf room.  A compatibility issue.  So - I ended up discussing the project old-school, sans slides.  Went a'right.  Hopefully, the audience felt the same.)

• Brodeck wins Independent Foreign Fiction prize - I read Brodeck earlier this year and largely agree with the Saloon's review - though I'd recommend it.
• Changing Denard Span - This is a nice anecdote of a system - perhaps - leading a young hitter astray.
• 'Blind' reviews in librarianship - Another anecdote.  This time on the 'failure' of blinded reviews in librarianship.  I suspect this is the case in many disciplines.
• Why do different countries have different book covers? - I'd never thought abt this before. 
• Martin Heidegger - Was a nazi.  Should we forgive?  Does this affect our understanding and acceptance of his philosophy?  A NYT piece. 
• David Mitchell's ugly new cover - I'm reading the book now (tnx to LibraryThing's early reviewers) and, yes, it's not the best cover.  Loving the book, though.  And - on the subject of David Mitchell - a rare bad review.  It's a fair criticism, I suppose, but - I think - overblows the purported downside of his prose construction. 
• Neil Gaiman, One Book, One Twitter - Over the last couple of years, a colleague has given me a few Gaiman comics to read.  I haven't liked too much, but I'm interested to read one of his novels.

That's the question that's been the focus of some heavy commentary over the last week or so.  Ryan Deschamps - a librarian in Halifax - kicked the discussion off w/ this list of 10 "anti-professional assumptions."

1. Librarians have no monopoly on the activities they claim
2. There are no consequences for failing to adhere to ethical practices
3. Librarianship is too generalized to claim any expertise
4. 'Librarian' assumes a place of work, rather than the work itself
5. Peer review in librarianship does not work because there is no competitieve process to go with it
6. Values are not enough
7. The primary motivation for professionalization is the monopoly of labor
8. Accredited library schools do not adequately prepare students for library work
9. Competing professions are offering different paradigms to achieve the same goals
10. Nobody can name a 'great' librarian

The comment thread (96 as of this writing) is full of fors and againsts and is, at times, heated.  So it provides for some interesting (entertaining) reading.  Personally, I'd put myself under the 'for' umbrella, but not b/c I agree or disagree w/ the 10 assumptions. In fact, I'm not sure the assumptions address the librarianship-as-profession question.  I just happen to define 'profession' liberally, and don't think every profession needs to be compared to medicine.  But overall, I don't think the classification matters much - what difference would it make one way or the other?

C - Carlos Ruiz
1B - Pujols
2B - Cano
3B - Ian Stewart
SS - Alcides Escobar
CF - BJ Upton
OF - Ethier
OF - Jay Bruce
UTIL - Colby Rasmus
BN - Nick Johnson
BN - Stephen Drew

SP - Hamels
SP - Jonathan Sanchez
RP - Mike Gonzalez
RP - Matt Capps
P - Matt Guerrier
P - Brandon League
BN - Jason Motte
BN - Franciso Liriano
BN - David Price

DL - Kerry Wood

This team lacks in a lot of areas, so I'm going into the season with low expectations.  A lot of upside, but not many sure things.  We'll see how it plays out.