« Understanding the attention economy | Main | The lack of uptake of new technology by researchers »

21/09/2010

Comments

AndyP

'Author pays' is one of the business models adopted by open access journals - the, so-called, gold route to open access - but it isn't the only model. There's quite a nice summary of the various models and terminology at http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm

That said, overall, I concur with your view.

What is interesting is the length of time it is taking for the web to kick in and change scholarly practice, particularly around peer-review. Consider yourself on a little Greenpeace speedboat confronting a large whaler - we need more speedboats!

AJ Cann

Most reputable publishers have waivers for their author pays model if the author(s) can demonstrate lack of funding. Alternatively, I'm finding Google Scholar more and more useful for surfacing copies of manuscripts hidden away in institutional OA repositries. What a mess.

Richard Hall

Where this sits as activity in a broader debate about the Open Web [and its enclosure through apps/paywalls etc], Open Education, OERs, is important. AndyP is right in his insistance that more people need to say no/take an active stance.

For me this is linked to your view on expert-led/started/informed critique, and open access, to publically-funded R&D. It is also part of a resistance to the privatisation of the public.

Be good.

John Kirriemuir

The thing is - and publishers must surely be aware of this and s*****ng themselves - there are a variety of methods of getting peer-reviewed articles. Some, such using http://scholar.google.co.uk/ are obvious. Others, perhaps less so, but they don't require obviously illegal activities like account hacking or impersonation; perhaps more legally grey areas.

And then there's the informal paper/article distribution that goes on anyway. I've sent copies of my peer-reviewed articles to chums. They've sent theirs to me. It's a fair trade, and means we don't have to bother the publishers and make things stressful for them over, what is essentially, content we made.

While publishers have so far had it damned lucky with academic content - compare to the music and film industries where paying for your content is more the exception than the norm - I feel they are living on borrowed time. Publisher incomes are mainly an indirect result of the metrics required and provided by a system such as peer-review in the higher echelons of global education.

This will change - it has to change - especially as they continue to price themselves out of the game. As it's got to the stage where some publishers charge more for the digital access to journals than the print access (WTF?) it's all getting very silly now. A Pirate Bay for peer-reviewed academic content, running on a Cayman Islands hosted server, should do it if any teccies have a few spare weekends...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Flickr

  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from edtechie99. Make your own badge here.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter