Is there some fields where this is way more of a problem (I'm guessing medicine)? As someone in computer vision you are often dealing with IEEE for conferences and journals, which has never struck me as that bad, although for a non-profit and as a member I would prefer they were a little more open. It is nice that CVPR has been open access for a couple of years.
Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
11–20 of 40 posts
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there are two challenges here. First, opting out of major publication venues is essentially sacrificing your career (no funding/tenure). Second, researchers simply don't have free time to start up an alternative publication system. I think the funding agencies can do a lot more here though...
OTOH, if everyone who had tenure already cooperated then they would wield considerable power at low risk.
[deleted]
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#13I think as time goes on we'll find that journals are able to do more and more of the work themselves in such a way that disrupts the monopoly as we know it today. Journals and the academic community already perform the review process themselves (with little reward) and are finding that the "typesetting" and "dissemination" value-adds from publishers are things that they can do on their own as well.
On a large scale, initiatives like PLOS One (http://www.plosone.org/) are a great example of this. On a smaller scale, journals like Sociological Science (http://www.sociologicalscience.com/) & (http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/stanford-gsb-experience/news-his...) are also being successful managing the entire toolchain themselves.
While things seem dire now, I'm confident they'll get better. Scholars with status are increasingly throwing their weight behind Open Access initiatives. Tim Gowers, that droque mentioned in this thread, is evidence of this.
Disclaimer: I co-founded a startup in the space (http://www.scholasticahq.com) and Sociological Science uses our platform for managing their peer review process.
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#14Tim Gowers (and several other mathematicians) called to boycott academic publishers with The Cost of Knowledge ( http://thecostofknowledge.com/ ), giving largely similar reasons. It had some success if I recall correctly.
Along similar lines, mathematicians (including Timothy Gowers and Terry Tao) created two free-access journals, the Forum of Mathematics Sigma [1] and Pi [2] that seek to provide a reputable and free alternative to some of the top-tier journals that are being boycotted. It's a bit akin to the PLoS journals --- free and reputable.
Hopefully some reputable open journals will distinguish themselves from the predatory journals that take advantage of unsuspecting junior researchers (or worse, that take advantage of unsuspecting people who don't know better).
[1]: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=FMs [2]: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=FMP
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#15> Traditionally, most journals were published by non-profit scientific societies. But when journals shifted from print to online digital formats, those societies couldn't afford the cost of the equipment needed to make the switch. Instead, they sold their journals to large, for-profit publishers
wait, what
I can't figure out how it would be possible that shifting from physical paper to online hosting could be more expensive
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#16> Traditionally, most journals were published by non-profit scientific societies. But when journals shifted from print to online digital formats, those societies couldn't afford the cost of the equipment needed to make the switch. Instead, they sold their journals to large, for-profit publishers wait, what I can't figure out how it would be possible that shifting from physical paper to online hosting could be more ex…
I think the switching costs are there
Especially if you have no domain knowledge in running a paywalled website, you could end up getting charged an insane amount of money by some consultants to set it up for you.
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#17In our class, we have discussed repeatedly that the best way to make money would be to start a new journal with the word "International" in it. The problem with some open access journals is that they accept anything. Apart from Computer Science(and physics as mentioned in the article), where most papers can be found as open access, there isn't an alternative for universities to buying content, even if open access wer…
There are actually tons of scam journals. I get emails semi-regularly asking me to submit something to these scam journals that usually don't even have anything to do with my research let alone any credibility.
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#18> Traditionally, most journals were published by non-profit scientific societies. But when journals shifted from print to online digital formats, those societies couldn't afford the cost of the equipment needed to make the switch. Instead, they sold their journals to large, for-profit publishers wait, what I can't figure out how it would be possible that shifting from physical paper to online hosting could be more ex…
I don't buy this. The real issue is prestige. Many journals use a large publisher for their brand name. As schools themselves manage to establish significant international brand awareness, they no longer need this service. There is currently no online/open access platform with academic prestige--because that can only come with time and a track record of proper review and rejection. When the larger players come together and form or use such a body, the smaller players will be able to migrate to it.
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#19> Traditionally, most journals were published by non-profit scientific societies. But when journals shifted from print to online digital formats, those societies couldn't afford the cost of the equipment needed to make the switch. Instead, they sold their journals to large, for-profit publishers wait, what I can't figure out how it would be possible that shifting from physical paper to online hosting could be more ex…
We sold our journal I think for two reasons. The first was to digitize them. We have a large electronic database that we are still not completely finished converting from microfiche. We've been working on it since the late 80s. The second was time commitment. We are small. 10-15 people on average. Only two real developers. The hosting commitment was daunting at the time.
Honestly, I don't know the whole story. I've only been around here for a few years.
Re: Academic publishers reap huge profits as libraries go broke
#20> Traditionally, most journals were published by non-profit scientific societies. But when journals shifted from print to online digital formats, those societies couldn't afford the cost of the equipment needed to make the switch. Instead, they sold their journals to large, for-profit publishers wait, what I can't figure out how it would be possible that shifting from physical paper to online hosting could be more ex…
I think the switching costs are there Especially if you have no domain knowledge in running a paywalled website, you could end up getting charged an insane amount of money by some consultants to set it up for you.
Based on a couple of years working for an academic publishers, I'd guess commonly it's lack of domain knowledge + switching cost + switching of mental models + sunk equipment costs. Most are very small, with very established ways of working; I found it incredibly frustrating at the time that my employer wouldn't even consider even minor shifts away from what seemed an enormously wasteful print model, it seemed utterly ridiculous at the time, but with some objectivity I find it completely understandable (still daft, and I'm glad to be out of the sector, but understandable)