In this update, the focus shifts to the value journal publishers offer, and who benefits.
The five stages of book publishing outlined here describe the arc as publishers move from the traditional model (where print books were sold mostly in bookstores and to libraries) through a range of developments using online media, culminating in new forms of subscription marketing.
Are we losing good articles to predatory journals, with little recourse for unsuspecting authors? Or are authors becoming increasingly complicit and symbiotic in their relationships with illegitimate publishing entities with disregard for the greater good? Maybe it’s both. Today’s guest post explores what can happen when an author accidentally falls into the predatory journal rabbit hole.
An interview with librarian and open access skeptic Jeffrey Beall. He discusses his work, the criteria for declaring an organization a “predatory publisher,” and how he would fix the scholarly communications system.
Thanks to a major new international research study, it’s no longer possible to pretend that predatory journals are not a serious problem that needs serious attention. The question is: do we have the will to confront it?
Predatory publishing is a big and complex problem; so is calling out and shaming deceptive publishers by means of blacklisting. Is that something we should even do, and can it be done fairly, constructively, and helpfully? Yes, and here are some suggestions how.
An interview by @lisalibrarian with Simon Linacre, author of “The Predator Effect”
The Public Library of Science was once a radical force, but is now dependent on author-pays bulk-publishing for its livelihood, which introduces all sorts of problems for every journal publisher. What went wrong?
One month since Science Magazine published its exposé on the lack of peer-review in, and deceptive business practices of, many open access journals, investigative reporter, John Bohannon, responds to critics.
Illegitimate – or predatory – journals are on the increase. What’s more, authors from high-, middle-, and low-income countries are now known to be publishing in them. Find out why this is the case and how we can work as a community to help stop their spread, in this interview with Kelly Cobey and Larissa Shamseer of Centre for Journalology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, to coincide with their new paper on the topic in Nature Human Behavior.
Gold open access publishing has proved to be successful, but it has certain limitations. This essay probes what those limitations are, but it argues that OA’s limitations do not outweigh its strengths. Gold OA most usefully coexists with traditional publishing models.
Publishers, librarians, researchers, and funders all have a stake in Open Access. What happens next? See what the Chefs have to say.
Emma Wilson from the Royal Society of Chemistry discusses their Read and Publish strategies for a transition to open access.
Those who argue that “predatory” behavior is not only a problem among author-pays OA publishers have a good point. But this raises another question: is the term “predatory” itself really useful in the context of scholarly communication?
Recent coordinated investigatory journalism articles, along with separate regulatory actions, are squeezing predatory publishers. But are the root causes being addressed?