<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lending Credibility to Fake Journals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/03/lending-credibility-to-fake-journals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/03/lending-credibility-to-fake-journals/</link>
	<description>What&#039;s Hot &#38; What&#039;s Cooking in Scholarly Publishing - from the Society for Scholarly Publishing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 05:01:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Controversial Math Journal Relauches: New Editors, Focus on Rigorous Review &#171; The Scholarly Kitchen</title>
		<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/03/lending-credibility-to-fake-journals/#comment-8880</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Controversial Math Journal Relauches: New Editors, Focus on Rigorous Review &#171; The Scholarly Kitchen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/?p=4321#comment-8880</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] company and including republished articles that supported the company&#8217;s products.  An initial refusal to investigate the issue lead many to question how serious the publisher was in adhering to their own ethical standards.  [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] company and including republished articles that supported the company&#8217;s products.  An initial refusal to investigate the issue lead many to question how serious the publisher was in adhering to their own ethical standards.  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Recherche/information scientifique (03/06/09) &#171; pintiniblog</title>
		<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/03/lending-credibility-to-fake-journals/#comment-6420</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Recherche/information scientifique (03/06/09) &#171; pintiniblog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/?p=4321#comment-6420</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Lending Credibility to Fake Journals     &#8220;Elsevier deserves blame for publishing &#8220;fake&#8221; journals. Doctors share some of the blame too. Let&#8217;s not view them as victims.&#8220; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Lending Credibility to Fake Journals     &#8220;Elsevier deserves blame for publishing &#8220;fake&#8221; journals. Doctors share some of the blame too. Let&#8217;s not view them as victims.&#8220; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/03/lending-credibility-to-fake-journals/#comment-3392</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/?p=4321#comment-3392</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The tacit involvement of academics extends well beyond medical journals and across the spectrum of quasi-scholarly vanity publishing.  Academics are easily fooled into lending their names, and by extension their prestige, to all manner of dubious publishing enterprises, such as those exposed by Richard Poynder and others.  There&#039;s not really any conflict of interest or kickbacks involved in these however (at least none that are obvious).  It&#039;s just egos seeking yet another outlet for self-promotion that requires no added effort or cost.  

But the OA vanity scammers are tame compared to the established publishers that should know better but just can&#039;t say no to cash.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The tacit involvement of academics extends well beyond medical journals and across the spectrum of quasi-scholarly vanity publishing.  Academics are easily fooled into lending their names, and by extension their prestige, to all manner of dubious publishing enterprises, such as those exposed by Richard Poynder and others.  There&#8217;s not really any conflict of interest or kickbacks involved in these however (at least none that are obvious).  It&#8217;s just egos seeking yet another outlet for self-promotion that requires no added effort or cost.  </p>
<p>But the OA vanity scammers are tame compared to the established publishers that should know better but just can&#8217;t say no to cash.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

