The two-stage study was conducted to analyze publication activity related to the use of the term “scientific legacy” in academic literature. The first stage focused on the theoretical conceptualization of scientific legacy as a key element of continuity in science and on the comprehensive bibliometric analysis of publications containing this term, published in journals indexed in the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) database. The applied methodology includes metadata analysis of publications using bibliometric methods and statistical data processing. The authors identified the historical phases of publication activity, key semantic The two-stage study was conducted to analyze publication activity related to the use of the term “scientific legacy” in academic literature. The first stage focused on the theoretical conceptualization of scientific legacy as a key element of continuity in science and on the comprehensive bibliometric analysis of publications containing this term, published in journals indexed in the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) database. The applied methodology includes metadata analysis of publications using bibliometric methods and statistical data processing. The authors identified the historical phases of publication activity, key semantic contexts of the term “scientific legacy”, and analyzed gender representation among authors and the individuals whose scientific legacy served as the subject of investigation in the selected materials. The findings revealed that most publications focused on personalized scientific legacy, reflecting the contributions of prominent scientists, while the systematic studies of scientific legacy as an independent phenomenon were scarce. The thematic analysis demonstrated increased interest in studying scientific legacy in the fields of history, law and governance, and pedagogy. Meanwhile, the significant gaps were identified in addressing the scientific legacy of female scientists and in exploring this phenomenon in several disciplines, including informatics, psychology, and biology. The authors emphasize the need for strategic initiatives to popularize, preserve, and enhance the accessibility of scientific legacy in the context of contemporary challenges. They also underscore the importance of deepening interdisciplinary approaches to its study and addressing gender and thematic imbalances in this scientific domain.

   Robert Darnton’s communication circuit model, initially developed to analyze book publishing practices between 1500 and 1800, has long served as a key instrument in numerous historical book and media studies, enabling a comprehensive examination of the interactions among authors, publishers, booksellers, and readers in the historical context. However, with the advent of the digital age – characterized by extensive digitization, evolving online platforms, self-publishing, and social media – the traditional structure of roles and functions in book communication has undergone radical transformation. In the digital space, readers can interact directly with authors, shaping demand for texts even before their official publication, while platforms and algorithms increasingly act as intermediaries, influencing the promotion and availability of the content. This tends to the disintermediation of the classic interaction chain and the emergence of new agents offering a range of services to both authors and readers. The author discusses the main challenges and changes introduced by the digital era into Darnton’s model, highlighting the new roles played by platforms, social media, and algorithms. On this basis, the author examines various approaches to adapting Darnton’s model to new realities, emphasizing its heuristic value for interdisciplinary research and outlining prospects for its further development in the rapidly changing media landscape. It is underscored that, despite the radical restructuring of roles, Darnton’s model retains its methodological significance and remains a vital reference point for the study of contemporary book communication.

   The authors examine the problems of social partnership of the institutes of culture and school libraries. They review the key publications on the topic, emphasize its importance and insufficient coverage. Based on the experience of the chair of library information resources of the East-Siberian State Institute of Culture, the authors characterize the vectors of interaction with the regional secondary school libraries. They analyze the school library staffing in the Buryat Republic and characterize staffing challenges. The authors explore into the collaborations with different partners, in particular, the regional centers of education development. The key vectors of cooperation with Buryat and Irkutsk Region school libraries in professional training and joint activities are specified. The process of library-teacher certification for qualification is described; their data sheets and charting difficulties are discussed. The vulnerabilities of social partnership between the Institute’s Information Resources Chair and school libraries are characterized. The authors conclude that the Information Resources Chair of the East-Siberian Institute of Culture delivers various forms of social partnership, i. e. experience sharing, joint projects and studies, and upgrading the quality of education.

   On September 24, 2024, a video interview was recorded by Yakov Leonidovich Shraiberg, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Education, Scientific Director of the State Public Scientific and Technical Library of Russia (GPSTB of Russia), editor-in-chief of the journal Scientific and Technical Libraries. The interview was conducted by Viktor Viktorovich Astanin, Advisor to the Director of the University of the Bank of Russia, Doctor of Law, Professor, author and lecturer of the University's training course program "Scientific Publication: Preparation and publication".

   The academic and educational publications are among the most demanded publications in the Russian book market and hold their substantial share. However, university publications do not find wide audience and are unknown to readers though needed by scientific community. To evaluate the demand for academic and scientific literature, the authors analyze 2021–2024 statistical data provided by the Russian Book Chamber. The books published by academic publishers make the significant share of the book market segment. According to the surveys conducted by the authors in 2020 and 2024, the Ural Federal University students and faculty are unaware of the products and services of university publishers which is a serious challenge for commercialization. The academic publishers lose their audience due to their invisibility and limited circulation of the published books though the academic readers are potentially interested. To resolve the situation, the awareness of academic publications and publishers has to be increased. For this purpose, the authors identify the promotion specific features for academic publishers as the book market players; they also discuss the publishers’ interior and exterior brand attributes. The case study of the Ural Federal University demonstrates the application of branding instruments.

   The article is dedicated to Yury Nikolaevich Stolyarov, an outstanding Russian librarian, and his contribution to the preservation of traditional library values. His role in preservation of the Library Science Office of the Russian State Library is demonstrated. The author focuses mainly on Stolyarov's contribution to the struggle against the merge of the Russian State Library (RSL) and the National Library of Russia (RNL). Stolyarov took the most active part in drafting the letter to RF President Vladimir Putin later signed by leading library scientists, in which objections to the merge of the two national libraries were substantiated. Yury Nikolaevich also participated in drafting the resolution of the Regnum news agency round table on the problem of merging these libraries. The main emphasis is placed on the outstanding scientist's civic position in defending the interests of national libraries.