Compared to their peak levels, publication volume has declined at MDPI by 27% and at Frontiers by 36%. What’s behind these declines, and how do they reflect the inherent risk in the APC open access model and different approaches to reputation management?
The Nelson Memo is being contested. Will the incumbents of the scholarly publishing world stand up for the Memo and fight for its funding?
Scale can be achieved by broadly outsourcing the editorial process. Does this lead to a loss in quality control, and is this acceptable?
There’s no denying the growth and increased acceptance of the concepts of open access in scholarly publishing. But the repercussions of the business models and methodologies chosen for OA are just beginning to be recognized.
Frontiers issues another statement about why the “Recursive Fury” paper was retracted, raising once again questions about why it was retracted, but shifting the focus more and more to how it was retracted.