University of California at Santa Cruz versus Elsevier
harnad at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Thu Oct 30 14:07:04 EST 2003
Again, the reasoning of the following well-informed comment takes one's
breath away: It is so well-intentioned, so near -- and yet so far off
the mark! And alas still so representative of current inchoate thinking
on the subject:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Mike Brown wrote:
> I believe given the
> current climate in the academic world that we will lose this round of
> the [boycott] battle and capitulate to Elsevier.
> Impact factor and RAEs here in the UK - few are willing to take up the
> call and boycott these journals for fear of being penalized when it
> comes to grant applications.
> Which looks better to a funding body:
> a) Publishing your [parasitology' work in an open access Journal
> b) Publishing your work in Trends in Parasitology (TiP, Elsevier)
> Sadly it seems the current state of play is that publishing in TiP looks
> better to a funding body
> Is this not crazy!?
> What we need is for more researchers to stop agreeing with us that open
> access is a great idea and start publishing more high-impact papers in
> Journals with open access models - this will make Elsevier sit up and
What is really crazy is that we keep expressing our desire for open access
through moratoriums and petitions like this instead of taking matters into
our own hands by self-archiving our own output! All Elsevier journals are
Romeo "blue/green," which means they support author self-archiving. Why
propose to boycott them instead of just taking them up on what can even be
interpreted as a challenge: "Why should I [Elsevier] take you seriously
about your alleged desire for open access if you can't even be be bothered
to provide it for yourselves when you are invited to?"
> I realize that open access is not about making research available to the
> developing nations (and yet... ;-)) - but it is my prime concern.
Open access is about making resaech available to *all* would-be users,
worldwide. What on earth is the point of asking researchers to
withold their papers from their preferred journals rather than simply
self-archiving them? That way they can have their RAE-cake and the world
can eat it too!
Quo usque tandem patientia nostra abutere...?
NOTE: Complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open
access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at
the American Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01 & 02 & 03):
Posted discussion to: september98-forum at amsci-forum.amsci.org
Dual Open-Access Strategy:
BOAI-2: Publish your article in a suitable open-access journal
whenever one exists.
BOAI-1: Otherwise, publish your article in a suitable toll-access
journal and also self-archive it.
More information about the Jrnlnote