> As for the funds, as Juan Pablo Alperin has underscored, the money is collected by SPARC,
> stored by NVF, and invoices are paid by NVF within the limits of the received money. What is
> even anonymous in this?
“Dark money” refers not to how the funds are spent, but where it comes from. If a funder receives donations and does not disclose the identities of the donors, it’s a dark-money funding operation (even if it is up front and transparent about how the money is spent). The NVF and Arabella Advisors are both dark-money groups. I didn’t “choose” the term; calling them “dark-money” groups is like calling Chevrolet an automobile company.
From: Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 3:59 PM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
But it is your fault that you choose this phrase - dark money - rather than, for example, anonymous funds.
Connotations. Connotations. When you choose words, they may convey more, much more, than the one particular definition which you find useful to foreground. I know that you like to search for definitions that fit with your worldview, but that does not guarantee their complete validity.
As for the funds, as Juan Pablo Alperin has underscored, the money is collected by SPARC, stored by NVF, and invoices are paid by NVF within the limits of the received money. What is even anonymous in this?
As for your own comfort with dark money, that is what is truly interesting in this conversation. Surprising too. If I were you, I would be concerned because of the ethical risks of saying more than intended. But perhaps you do not see that risk. Or you do not care. Who knows?
jcgLe 2024-08-23 à 17:14, Rick Anderson a écrit :
It’s not my fault that the phrase “dark money” contains the word “dark.” It really is a widely-used term that has a real and specific meaning, it applies to organizations across the political spectrum, and there’s no question that it applies to both the NVF and Arabella.
SPARC is a wholly-owned project of the NVF; the NVF is a “client and partner” of Arabella. The relationship between SPARC and these dark-money organizations is objectively real.
Again, it’s odd that I seem to be the only person in this conversation who is fully comfortable with SPARC being a part of and supported by dark money. As I said before, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with it – any more than dark chocolate is intrinsically worse than milk chocolate, or dark glasses are more evil than clear ones.
From: Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 3:04 PM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
Connotation, Rick. Connotation!!! Dark money. Dark.
Le 2024-08-23 à 15:35, Rick Anderson a écrit :
Juan, you’ve already said that you’re not willing to engage further, which I find unfortunate – but of course that’s your choice.
If you do change your mind, though, I’d be interested in answers to the following questions (from you or anyone else who has relevant knowledge):
1. It appears that SPARC exists entirely as a unit (called a “project”) of the NVF. The NVF refers to it more specifically as an “incubated” project. From what I can tell (correct me if I’m wrong), SPARC does not seem to have its own tax ID or file a 990 form; on the NVF’s 2020 990 form, SPARC’s Executive Director was listed as an employee with the title “Project Director.” This does refer to her role at SPARC, doesn’t it? (And it doesn’t look like she’s on that form for 2021 or 2022 – which is odd, because as recently as August 2022 the NVF’s president confirmed that “Ms. Joseph is an employee of the New Venture Fund.”)
2. If so – if, that is, SPARC is a project fully contained organizationally within the NVF, one whose Executive Director is an NVF employee, then is it not the case that funds donated to SPARC are, in fact, donations to the NVF? (This form from the Rita Allen Foundation would certainly seem to suggest that.)
3. If, in fact, donations to SPARC are actually legally donations to the NVF, then isn’t it actually correct to say that “money that NVF collects is used to finance SPARC’s activities,” most notably the work of its leadership?
I’m also puzzled by the accusation that I’m using “contortions to connect SPARC to Arabella.” Arabella itself refers to NVF as “our clients and partners” and says that their “comprehensive and innovative approach to fiscal sponsorship” was “developed in conjunction with the team at Arabella Advisors.” NVF is a “client and partner” of Arabella; NVF employs SPARC’s executive director. No contortions needed; that’s a direct line of connection.
I want to say clearly one more time that I am not now, nor have I ever, implied that there’s anything improper about this relationship. The fact that so many people are reacting so strongly to the discussion of the relationship makes me wonder if they’re actually less comfortable with it than I am.
From: Juan Pablo Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 12:30 PM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
Rick,
Sure. I'll correct you.
Money flows from NVF to SPARC, but IT IS SPARC's OWN MONEY. The money collected from membership dues and grants gets held at NVF and then NVF pays invoices on behalf of SPARC as a service. The money SPARC collects is held at NVF, but it is not that NVF is inserting money from elsewhere into SPARC's budget. Any suggestion that money that NVF collects is being used to finance SPARC's activities is simply wrong.
Your (and Kent's, and Richard's) ignorance on how Fiscal Sponsorship works and contortions to connect SPARC to Arabella are galling.
I have done my part in drawing attention to your misinformation and will not engage further on this—at least not with you. If anyone else is concerned about this and would like to learn about my own experience with fiscal sponsorship, or as a SPARC Steering Committee member, I would be happy to engage off-list.
Juan Pablo Alperin
Associate Professor, Publishing
Scientific Director, Public Knowledge Project
Co-Director, Scholarly Communications Lab
Simon Fraser University
On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 at 08:26, Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
What have I said about the relationship between SPARC and NVF that is not accurate? I’m happy to be corrected.
From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 9:24 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
You continue to misunderstand the relationship between NVF and SPARC, apparently willfully.
Kevin L. Smith, M.L.S., J.D.
He, him, his
Michael and Eugenia Wormser Director of Libraries
Colby College
207-859-5104
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 11:22 AM Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
This is not a campaign against SPARC, Kevin. This conversation began when I made a passing reference, during a brief discussion about the role of lobbyists in public policy around open scholarship, to SPARC’s dark-money backers. I thought this was common knowledge, but apparently it’s coming as news to some on the list and not everyone seems happy about it.
At no point have I attacked SPARC. As I said below, there’s nothing illegal or unethical about using dark money. Nor is SPARC under any legal or ethical obligation to disclose its financials. It seems odd to me that simply mentioning uncontested and publicly verifiable facts about how SPARC does business is being characterized as an attack upon them.
From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 9:17 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
Why this campaign against SPARC RIck? It makes for a tiresome discussion of misunderstanding and misinformation. It is not surprising that IVF pays Heather's salary, since they manage
SPARC's finances for them. But that does not tell us where the money comes from, and it certainly does not mean money is flowing from this Arrabella Network to SPARC.
Surely there are more productive discussions to be had?
Kevin
Kevin L. Smith, M.L.S., J.D.
He, him, his
Michael and Eugenia Wormser Director of Libraries
Colby College
207-859-5104
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 11:12 AM Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
It’s simply not true that no money flows from NVF to SPARC. As is made clear on the NVF’s 990 form, the NVF pays Heather Joseph’s salary directly, and that constitutes a significant flow of funds. The degree to which other funds flow (if at all) between them is currently impossible to say, since SPARC doesn’t make its financials public.
From: Juan Pablo Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, August 23, 2024 at 8:59 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
I think both you and Poynder have a big misunderstanding of how fiscal sponsorship works. No money flows from NVF to SPARC--it's the other way around: SPARC pays NVF for the services it receives.
Fiscal sponsorship is quite common and doesn't involve undisclosed contributions to the sponsored project. The sponsorship part of that term doesn't mean funding, it means an administrative home.
Juan
On Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 17:38 Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
“Dark money” is a political term of art that implies nothing sinister or illegitimate – what’s “dark” about it is that the sources of the money aren’t publicly disclosed. (For example, the New Venture Fund, which underwrites SPARC, is actually part of the Arabella network, neither of which is mentioned on the Grants and Donations page. SPARC itself is notably less than transparent about its finances. To my knowledge, there’s nothing illegal or unethical about what they’re doing – but then, there’s nothing illegal or necessarily unethical about dark money.)
Richard Poynder’s essay and interview with Heather Joseph does a very nice job of summarizing and explaining the dark money behind SPARC:
https://poynder.blogspot.com/2022/01/oa-and-fiscal-sponsorship-interview.html
From: Juan Pablo Alperin <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, August 22, 2024 at 6:08 PM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
SPARC's "dark money backers"? Do you mean the folks on the very publicly available list of Grants and Donations: https://sparcopen.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Grants-and-Donations_05_2023.pdf
You seriously consider the funding that happens for the Publishing Lobby to be clean, but the grants and donations received by SPARC to be "dark money"?
I served on the board of SPARC between 2015-18 and never saw any hint of anything nefarious.
Juan Pablo Alperin
Associate Professor, Publishing
Scientific Director, Public Knowledge Project
Co-Director, Scholarly Communications Lab
Simon Fraser University
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 at 10:07, Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I don’t think anyone is claiming that no lobbyists were involved. I’m sure the publishing lobby was pushing for these reports, just as I’m sure SPARC and its dark-money backers were pushing for the Nelson OSTP’s update of the Holdren Memo.
From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 11:05 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: James O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
So it's a small group of dedicated public servants, engaged in rational analysis and discourse with one another, and independently coming up with similar thoughtful and eirenic recommendations? No politicians, no lobbyists, no vested interests, nobody whose ox might be gored, just pure and serene public policy? An inspiring thought, but really?
Jim O'Donnell
ASU
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 9:05 AM Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
It’s the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, each of which has written a separate report expressing concern about implementation of the Nelson Memo.
Relevant section of the House committee report: https://www.congress.gov/118/crpt/hrpt582/CRPT-118hrpt582.pdf#page=92
… and of the Senate committee report: https://www.congress.gov/118/crpt/srpt198/CRPT-118srpt198.pdf#page=149
From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 at 10:00 AM
To: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [OPENCAFE-L] Legislative opposition to the Nelson Memo continues to fail to die...
Rick, where do you think this opposition is coming from? “Appropriators” is a very anonymous screen behind which is … ?
Jim O’Donnell
ASU
On Monday, August 19, 2024, Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/lawmakers-raise-new-licensing-concerns-over-white-house-open-access-mandate
Pull quote: “appropriators in both chambers of Congress have advanced legislation that would block federal agencies from limiting authors’ ability to choose how to license their work.”
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask]
--
|
|
Harmony Guthrie | Community Strategy Associate Wiley-BlackwellPersonal account, views expressed do not reflect the views of my employer.  [log in to unmask]
 www.wiley.com/
 111 River Street, Hoboken NJ,
07030-5774 |
Access the OPENCAFE-L
Home Page and Archives
To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to:
[log in to unmask]