UofC system cancels Elsevier subscriptions.


https://www.chronicle.com/arti...fornia-System/245798

Elsevier sounds like a piece of work.

Love to get RF’s take.

There was a time when I was told I could make freely available my papers on the WWW, just that I had to call them “preprints” because the actual papers as published are copyrighted by the journals or conferences. But calling them “preprints” were fine.

Things have of coursed evolved, and researchers are more organized with making “preprints” freely available while still keeping the paid journals in business.

I certainly welcome more free, open access to academic publications. That said, I don’t have a clear understanding of how the process of gathering, curating, reviewing, editing, and publishing of papers get financed. The Internet has lowered and spread the distribution cost thin, but that’s only a fraction of the cost of making scholarly articles available. Assuming no pay wall and no subscription fees, where would the funding come from?

quote:

Originally posted by Axtremus:
There was a time when I was told I could make freely available my papers on the WWW, just that I had to call them “preprints” because the actual papers as published are copyrighted by the journals or conferences. But calling them “preprints” were fine.

Things have of coursed evolved, and researchers are more organized with making “preprints” freely available while still keeping the paid journals in business.

I certainly welcome more free, open access to academic publications. That said, I don’t have a clear understanding of how the process of gathering, curating, reviewing, editing, and publishing of papers get financed. The Internet has lowered and spread the distribution cost thin, but that’s only a fraction of the cost of making scholarly articles available. Assuming no pay wall and no subscription fees, where would the funding come from?

Those are good questions Ax, but Elsevier certainly isn't hurting with something like a 37% net profit margin. It's exhorbitant fees are probably the answer. Plus their editors are volunteers and not paid. They aren't without controversy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier

Stumbled across this today; seemed kinda related.

https://getpocket.com/explore/...ience-s-pirate-queen

As if September 17, my company was purchased by the evil empire so I’m no longer unbiased.

quote:

Originally posted by rustyfingers:
As if September 17, my company was purchased by the evil empire so I’m no longer unbiased.

I was listening to an NPR commentary on it and thinking of you. From another who has been bought out...(Layoffs seem to come every Thursday)..

P*D may also have some interesting insights. Part of the issue with Elsevier (or any of the mega-academic publishers) is they control so much content, and they negotiate with universities to get the highest subscription costs possible. Nothing wrong with that on its face (despite all the noble rhetoric about relevance and curiosity). Where the problem becomes acute (and is pointed out in the article, mentioning public universities and small privates as particularly vulnerable) is the combination of demographics (fewer college-age kids up through about 2027) and the drastic reduction in public funding for higher ed. Elsevier may want to get the highest dollar possible, but there are fewer and fewer dollars to go around.

As for where the money comes from to publish in a journal, the answer really is "it depends." Some journals are 100% author-funded. Others work on a hybrid. None are free (with the exeption of letters and notes in places like Nature, I think). Every research grant includes publishing costs in its research budget, so in some ways we pay for the cost of publishing in these journals.

Detail in this Atlantic piece.

I hadn’t heard about ‘plan S’.

https://www.theatlantic.com/sc...er-publisher/583909/

quote:

Originally posted by Axtremus:
That said, I don’t have a clear understanding of how the process of gathering, curating, reviewing, editing, and publishing of papers get financed.

I think the major complaint is that the universities provide the vast bulk of the labor for free. They are the authors and the reviewers.


It seems to me that this model would have died already but for the status-conferring role of the major journals, both for the authors and the editors. It is taking a while for open access to replicate that, if it ever will.

Why not publish journals directly to the net?

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:

quote:

Originally posted by Axtremus:
That said, I don’t have a clear understanding of how the process of gathering, curating, reviewing, editing, and publishing of papers get financed.

I think the major complaint is that the universities provide the vast bulk of the labor for free. They are the authors and the reviewers.


It seems to me that this model would have died already but for the status-conferring role of the major journals, both for the authors and the editors. It is taking a while for open access to replicate that, if it ever will.

Don't underestimate the status-conferring role. It's important for tenure.

And there's the peer review aspect too.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Miller:
Why not publish journals directly to the net?

Someone else can probably answer this in more detail, but basically the problem is ensuring that the article will be available premantely. Just think about what happens here at WTF.

Who will host the data? Who will make sure that it remains available with the same URL or locator, keep all the severs maintained, ensure that the content is preserved...

These things are complicated, not insurmountable, but complicated. Many online journals still have a hard copy version as well, and there’s still a pretty big contingent that views the journals with a print version as more legit.

Interesting.

One would there no that the info could be stored to the cloud for almost nothing and the apropriate educational institutions could keep it there without much fuss. Seems pretty straightforward these days.

There is probably more to it than I know.