Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

newscientist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 312 posts

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#211

Post by idiot900 »

dougmccune wrote: post #115

Academic publishing is a favorite recurring topic on HN, and it's one I've occasionally dipped into discussing, although these discussions are typically 99% one-sided and void of nuance or reasoned arguments. It's like discussing politics online. I'm a shareholder and board member of a large privately-held, family-owned academic publishing company. If anyone is interested in trying to understand what makes the indust…

I agree, the solution is not a technical one, it's about money. If funding agencies require, as they should, day one free and open access, the problem will solve itself. Not without a good deal of temporary pain, but it will be solved. (I am an early career professor who has to worry about promotion - and am happy to bear the pain of such a transition.)

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#212

Post by gigatexal »

chrisseaton wrote: post #173
gigatexal wrote: post #163

How about this: after 1 year peer reviewed publications get released under a BSD license? Because this research needs to be available to all and this would give publishing shops enough time to sell to universities and people who want it now.

BSD is a licence for software. Papers are literature. How’s that going to work?

A community open free to the world license then. The exact license isn’t the point but that the research is not locked away behind a paywall but free to benefit society and not let a few pocket and profit from the research often done by public institutions like universities and such.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#213

Post by simonh »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #209
dougmccune wrote: post #115

Academic publishing is a favorite recurring topic on HN, and it's one I've occasionally dipped into discussing, although these discussions are typically 99% one-sided and void of nuance or reasoned arguments. It's like discussing politics online. I'm a shareholder and board member of a large privately-held, family-owned academic publishing company. If anyone is interested in trying to understand what makes the indust…

One upvote is not from agreement, but from interest to see replies to your comment (which upvoting it makes more likely). Personally, I do think the matter is complex. However, if you're trying to protect the current model by arguing that building a reputation costs money, you will not convince those who, quite reasonably, believe it should be earned by contributions to knowledge, instead.

Do you think the current legacy model of journals and the peer review of articles isn't contributing to knowledge?

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#214

Post by mcv »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #185
chrisseaton wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because those people are already being paid anyway - their full time jobs, whether that’s PhD student, lecturer, professor, or industrial researcher, includes the job of reviewing and editing for publications. It’s a society. You publish papers which get reviews, and you also work to review other people’s papers. Everyone contributes to make it work.

> Because those people are already being paid anyway What about when the tax payers fund the research and then they have to pay to access it? Didn't they "already pay for it"?

I think it would make a lot of sense for countries to have laws stating that the results of publicly funded research must be publicly available. It's bizarre to allow a profit-driven business to monopolise and exploit it without paying for it.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#215

Post by mcv »

chrisseaton wrote: post #201
FabHK wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question wasn't "who is paying them?", the question was "why aren't the publishers paying them?". And that is a crucial question, and not answered by the observation that they are already paid by others.

The answer to 'why' is that no money changes hands for any review - not to pay to get a review for your paper, and not to review a paper for someone else. It's a social system. You 'pay' for reviews of your papers, by reviewing other people's papers. All the publisher does is connect people up and produce the final product. You can argue that the cost to subscribe is therefore too high for that service. Fine, it may…

But the publisher is the one making the profit here. From other people's work, that other people pay for. The publisher doesn't add any real value to the process. They charge a high price for people to access other people's work. At no point does the publisher pay anyone for anything, yet they do get all the profit.

It's pretty clear why this is a stupid system, isn't it?

Simply saying "but that's the way it is" is not an answer. It's the problem.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#216

Post by jamesrcole »

dougmccune wrote: post #115

Academic publishing is a favorite recurring topic on HN, and it's one I've occasionally dipped into discussing, although these discussions are typically 99% one-sided and void of nuance or reasoned arguments. It's like discussing politics online. I'm a shareholder and board member of a large privately-held, family-owned academic publishing company. If anyone is interested in trying to understand what makes the indust…

> I know the industry is particularly frustrating to the HN crowd. We want to think it's a technology problem - that distributing PDFs is a solved problem (which it obviously is).

That's not at all my impression of these discussions. If people thought it was just a technical problem, then they'd think it would be easy to change the current setup. If people thought it was just a technical problem they wouldn't have such a strong dislike for the publishers.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#217

Post by dempseye »

sweezyjeezy wrote: post #157
elvinyung wrote: post #72

Here's a Twitter thread with a director at Elsevier (@mrgunn) making extremely snarky comments about why they think academia shouldn't be free and widely available: https://twitter.com/dgmacarthur/status/1028489457803161600

I will never know why CEOs wade into Twitter spats like this. So little to be gained, so much to lose. Maybe lack of control of ego leads to better decisions elsewhere, I don't know...

I suppose you don't have to worry about reputational damage when everybody already thinks you're a parasite.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#218

Post by BurnGpuBurn »

I've always wondered why scientists, arguably the smartest people around, would fall for this blatantly obvious racket. And why they keep going back to the racketeer for years on end too, wasting millions in tax money while keeping the valuables behind lock and key for most of us.

It's so obvious you're being ripped off. What the heck scientists?

No wonder people believe in conspiracy theories, with a bunch of scientists denying them the knowledge while a bunch of business suits hoard the cash.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#219

Post by dalore »

BurnGpuBurn wrote: post #218

I've always wondered why scientists, arguably the smartest people around, would fall for this blatantly obvious racket. And why they keep going back to the racketeer for years on end too, wasting millions in tax money while keeping the valuables behind lock and key for most of us. It's so obvious you're being ripped off. What the heck scientists? No wonder people believe in conspiracy theories, with a bunch of scient…

Because of the prestige of being in a journal.

Re: Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research

#220

Post by jonathanstrange »

a3_nm wrote: post #172
esfandia wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You have to realize publishers are in the reputation business. That's right, and that's also why the prestigious researchers and universities, those with an already established reputation, have a responsibility: collectively leave the editorial boards of for-profit publishers, set up alternative venues with the help of university libraries. Share the archival, indexing and discovery effort among universities via pe…

The problem is that the vast majority of established researchers do not care that the system is broken. Why work against the system once you're at the top? Most of them haven't ever thought about it, and the ones who know usually don't do much, because, hey, that's the way it was always done, they are used to the current journals and conferences being prestigious, and they don't want to bother with the unglamorous wo…

My problem is that I'm being continuously evaluated on the basis of my publications and the future of my position literally depends on this evaluation every year.

I have to get as many publications into as highly reputed international journals as possible if I want to have any chance at getting a permanent position, and the vast majority of all reputable journals in my area are behind private paywalls. There is a maximum of 3 reputable, fully open journals and they are still not as prestigious as the established ones.

If I decided to only publish open access journals from now on, that would be immediate professional suicide. According to our institute's internal regulations, I'd be gone in two years from now, maybe even in one if they interpret their rules more strictly.

Post reply on HN