ABSTRACT
This chapter examines a set of theoretical questions surrounding observation, readership, and openness for niche, esoteric research practices across a range of disciplines. These include: What behavioral changes might one expect to see in a world of mass readership? How does a new set of publics sit alongside emergent managerial practices at institutions focusing on public "impact"? The chapter focuses on the fears around a broader, unknown public audience, particularly for some of the humanities disciplines, carries a far greater potential for the amplification of shame. Before it is possible to venture any remarks upon shame in academic publishing and readership, it is first necessary to give some definition of shame that could work within the scholarly communications context. And to explain how it would be linked to observation and visibility, the subjects focused upon by the open-access movement. The chapter also discusses the academic publishing and presents the number of reasons why academic material has limited circulation.
