tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post307883097070258955..comments2024-03-17T08:30:21.129+00:00Comments on Open and Shut?: Elsevier’s Alicia Wise on the RWA, the West Wing, and Universal AccessRichard Poynderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-14151122452505855692012-02-27T23:55:43.135+00:002012-02-27T23:55:43.135+00:00I hope that Alica will still answer a question on ...I hope that Alica will still answer a question on this old post, and one that is perhaps only obliquely related to the subject.<br /><br />What copyright agreement do authors of 'sponsored' article sign? I've emailed the address given on the relevant page, but received no response.<br /><br />The standard copyright agreement is on the Elsevier website for all to see, so I see no harm in making public the other one (if it is indeed different).Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09268986926485303519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-73664550531894634162012-02-25T00:48:52.445+00:002012-02-25T00:48:52.445+00:00Those who oppose the RWA have yet to make a good c...Those who oppose the RWA have yet to make a good case for why the NIH policy is the optimal solution for providing access to government-funded research. What you get, under that policy, is access to Green OA versions of articles (unless the publisher allows for posting of versions of record), which are less than fully satisfactory for scholarly citation purposes, and you only get even this access 12 months AFTER publication in a journal. That is a long time to wait for the latest research. Would it not be far preferable to mandate that all government agencies post IMMEDIATELY the FINAL research reports that funded scholars are required to submit? As for peer review, we are moving in the direction of post-publication crowd review anyway, so why does the NIH need the form of the article after peer review (but before copyediting, etc.)? What value does THAT peer review (which is for the purpose of academic accreditation) have for the public at large?Sandy Thatchernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-55136757105471364732012-02-14T17:01:15.543+00:002012-02-14T17:01:15.543+00:00As a science librarian I have watched Elsevier and...As a science librarian I have watched Elsevier and other commercial publisher's costs erode our materials budgets for the past 30 years. I have even written several articles analysing the costs using word counts of articles in which I found that articles published in commercial jorunals cost our library 4 times as much as articles published in non-profit journals. I have also been aware of the continual double digit profits of Elsevier and other commercial publishers while our library budgets have sometimes seen no increase or even been reduced. <br /><br />I have heard Elsevier argue that it has seen the error of its past ways and is trying to be a good citizen now by holding down its price increases. However, when your journals are already hugely expensive (Brain Research is currently around $24,000 for an annual subscription), how much help is a 2% or 3% increase on an already hugely expensive journal. <br /><br />I suspect that Elsevier's bottom line still shows double digit profits while paying their executives 6 and probably in some cases 7 figure salaries. <br /><br />I hope the current boycott is successful. I hope that authors turn to OA journals and/or journals published by their non-profit professional associations. We have the recent example in Topology where the entire editorial staff left a commercial journal because, at least partly, of disgust for the high price of the journal and started a much more reasonably priced journal. I hope that happens more. <br /><br />Libraries are caught in the middle of this. We have been forced to cut and cut again and again in areas that were vulnerable to save "big deals" with companies like Elsevier. We have had little choice since that is where the articles were being published.John Christensen, Science Librariannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-22112186711004997832012-02-11T11:09:19.565+00:002012-02-11T11:09:19.565+00:00Thanks, Richard, and hi, Jan -
When I talk about ...Thanks, Richard, and hi, Jan -<br /><br />When I talk about sustainable open access models or sustainability generally, I am talking about sustainable journals and services. <br /><br />With kind wishes,<br /><br />AliciaAlicia Wise @wisealichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17895015713727977331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-35005736354380415382012-02-11T09:42:45.329+00:002012-02-11T09:42:45.329+00:00These are important questions Jan. I have asked Al...These are important questions Jan. I have asked Alicia if she can respond.Richard Poynderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-26022699485637035812012-02-10T16:45:46.624+00:002012-02-10T16:45:46.624+00:00There is talk about 'sustainable' and '...There is talk about 'sustainable' and 'sustainability' quite a few times in the interview. Did you ask if that was sustainability of services or journals? Or of profit levels? Would a single journal that went from 35% profit to 10% profit (for instance because it was converted to 'gold' OA) still be regarded sustainable? And if that were to happen to the whole journal programme, across the board? Benchmarking 'sustainability' would be an interesting thing.Jan Velteropnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-65102946632106188742012-02-10T14:22:01.227+00:002012-02-10T14:22:01.227+00:00Dear all,
There have been a number of ad hominem ...Dear all,<br /><br />There have been a number of ad hominem remarks made about Alicia Wise here in the last few days. I moderate comments, so I was able to review them before they went up, and as they were not very polite I also forwarded them to Alicia first.<br /><br />Alicia insisted that they should be published, on the grounds that she did not want anyone’s speech supressed. She even responded to the first comment.<br /><br />However, I personally do not believe that personal attacks are ever helpful. They certainly make it extremely difficult to have a rational discussion.<br /><br />I would be most grateful, therefore, if in future people would refrain from making personal remarks about others. Let’s have a civilised discussion!<br /><br />Richard PoynderRichard Poynderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-88966849474169390122012-02-09T22:59:31.625+00:002012-02-09T22:59:31.625+00:00Thanks for this excellent interview Richard. It sh...Thanks for this excellent interview Richard. It shows that Elsevier is not in the least impressed by all the commotion. For that more pressure is needed.<br /><br />I suggest the following action. Make a list of Elsevier's 2000 editors-in-chief and match it with the current 5000+ boycotters. This produces a list of highly qualified (admittedly, Elsevier journals are good) potential editors-in-chief who are free!! Approach them for OA journals. If you are lucky, they bring their complete editorial board and you can kick-start an excellent OA journal.leo waaijershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15313746974886824921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-73194955019407960202012-02-09T19:39:34.679+00:002012-02-09T19:39:34.679+00:00Thank you, Richard, for this most revealing interv...Thank you, Richard, for this most revealing interview. Is it my poor feel for the English language or does Wise not sense an awkwardness when she relays an answer from Reller containing the phrase "to educate the Congresswoman"? <br /><br />I felt the urge to think about the educational material - and a stack of Dollar bills came to my mind.Hans Pfeiffenbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14136248320529653316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-79147856990371703082012-02-09T13:25:59.297+00:002012-02-09T13:25:59.297+00:00Alicia,
My post was not a personal attack. I coul...Alicia,<br /><br />My post was not a personal attack. I could have loaded it with factually-correct anecdotes and, indeed, made it a long, personal, specific attack. However, this would be a distraction from the core issue here, which is Elsevier's morally and ethically bankrupt practice with respect to knowledge ownership and costs.<br /><br />I am not surprised that you (patronisingly) "don't remember" me. I'm one of the little people in academia, spending many hundreds of hours of my own - unpaid - time producing and reviewing content for no remittance. Just to stay in the same job, as that's how the system works. Meanwhile, your company directly profits from selling the product of my (in)voluntary labour, and you sit there on a six figure salary, effectively paid for by my work and the work of many academics like me. The little people who you don't remember, Alicia.<br /><br />You are right on just one thing. We'll have to agree to disagree on Elseviers sole focus on profit. <br /><br />I'm done here. There are other people, with a sense of ethic and moral direction, who engage in more satisfying and honest debate.<br /><br />Regards,<br />RichardRichard Jonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-31500049032960076722012-02-08T18:07:40.475+00:002012-02-08T18:07:40.475+00:00@Joe
Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed it...@Joe<br />Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed it.Richard Poynderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-48590547068575108192012-02-08T17:55:49.611+00:002012-02-08T17:55:49.611+00:00There's an error in this article -- fourth par...There's an error in this article -- fourth paragraph in, where it says "Co-sponsored by Representatives Darrell Issa (D-NY) and Carolyn Maloney (R-CA)," their reported constituencies are incorrect. Carolyn Maloney is from NY, and Issa is from California.Joe Easterlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315373425973527851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-31398545167952369752012-02-08T17:54:20.623+00:002012-02-08T17:54:20.623+00:00Richard Jones,
Unfortunately I don't remember...Richard Jones,<br /><br />Unfortunately I don't remember you, and clearly made a bad impression. Ad hominem comments are not really helpful to this, or any, discussion. <br /><br />No company can be solely focussed on profits, but I suspect we will have to agree to disagree on this point.<br /><br />- AliciaAlicia Wisenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-36077648204278236192012-02-08T15:27:33.162+00:002012-02-08T15:27:33.162+00:00Just a small reminder: Gold OA is not as described...Just a small reminder: Gold OA is not as described here, or rather, it is not limited to what is being described here. Gold OA is publishing in Open Access without any a priori thesis about the means used to pay for scholarly and scientific publications. Gold OA is agnostic as to the financial model used, and such a model can range from the author(proxy)-pay to total subsidies from whatever source, including, of course, governmental sources.<br /><br />Scielo is an important example of Gold OA (more than 800 journals), without direct costs either to authors or readers, and, so far at least, it has lived exclusively on the basis of subsidies.<br /><br />To those who speak in terms of business models and sustainability, I would like to add that scientific research itself is unsustainable without large governmental subsidies, and this has been the case since at least the 17th century. Furthermore, the lifecycle of research is meaningless without publishing, which means that publishing is an integral part of research. This also means that there is no reason why publishing should be treated differently from the rest of the research process. It should be subsidized at least as much as scientific research itself is subsidized. Moreover, in many countries, large governmental subsidies are already present to support scientific publishing. <br /><br />Finally, let us remember that the cost of publishing, in the case of science, is about 1%, which means that the money is already essentially there, especially if existing subsidies are taken into account.<br /><br />The economy of knowledge production fundamentally rests on the free circulation of results and data. Anything that slows down this process ends up slowing down the process of science itself. Putting a price on scientific results is such a barrier and, rather than being taken as the defaul, for-granted, normal,position, it should justify itself. It should in fact demonstrate that it is absolutely necessary. However, thousands of good journals produced in contexts other than commercial demonstrate that commercialism is not absolutely necessary. Alternatives to the commercial world exist and they serve the ends of science better. And a lot of public money can be directed in that direction rather than the direction of extremely profitable companies."<br /><br />Jean-Claude GuédonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-46702726763498859392012-02-08T15:12:16.535+00:002012-02-08T15:12:16.535+00:00@Cagefree
You are probably factually correct - sci...@Cagefree<br />You are probably factually correct - scientists are losing their spine. But the world isn't. That's why we have to take science out beyond the walls of academia.<br /><br />petermrpeter murray-rusthttp://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-73153750396689049612012-02-08T14:50:50.466+00:002012-02-08T14:50:50.466+00:00Peter, I think this is a general major problem in ...Peter, I think this is a general major problem in scientific community: people get used to the reality as it is and don't have enough courage and/or diligence to change anything. They take system for granted. They adapt. It shows up not only in the way how they not react to this particular issue, but also to a review process both in journals and NIH grants and how science is being funded.CagefreeSciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151036730108897103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-81592981905756908212012-02-08T14:36:42.007+00:002012-02-08T14:36:42.007+00:00Fantastic post. Can I take issue with one small po...Fantastic post. Can I take issue with one small point, however?<br /><br /><i>In recent years, therefore, a new form of publishing has emerged in which publishers levy a one-off article-processing charge, and then make the papers they publish freely available on the Web — a model known as open-access publishing, or Gold OA.</i><br /><br />This author-pays business model is one possible form of Gold OA publishing, but it doesn't exhaust the possibilities. Other models do exist, including Open Journal Systems-run publications that often operate entirely on volunteer labor.<br /><br />It's a small side point in what is otherwise a vital discussion, but it's important to maintain that broader view of what open-access publishing can be, particularly for benefit of those fields (such as those in the humanities) that will never have the resources to support author-pays publishing.KFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14744032982329173041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-8413573336366091572012-02-08T13:52:39.729+00:002012-02-08T13:52:39.729+00:00Even several years after dealings with Alicia at h...Even several years after dealings with Alicia at her previous post in the JISC, the responses are instantly recognisable as hers. Give an appearance of being polite, innocent and open in public; be rather less conciliatory when dealing with people and organisations (and also some of her work colleagues) in a less public setting. Which is perhaps why she is a perfect fit for a public, senior, role in Elsevier.<br /><br />"Our goal is to provide customers with value for money: we constantly drive down the cost/access for high quality information." No, Alicia; your sole goal is to maximise profit for the parent company, as consistently demonstrated over the years.<br /><br />The part about not knowing about American politics made me laugh out loud. It is strange that Ms Wise regaled us with her detailed analysis of the financial aspects of the Bush vs Gore election fight in 2000, before one JISC programme meeting, for someone who claims not to know about things. I think you will find that Ms Wise has possessed a deep knowledge of things financial in American business and politics.<br /><br />Alicia's responses do not surprise me, and I suspect they will not surprise some or many of her previous work colleagues. Only the most gullible would award them credibility. Thank you for posting them.Richard Jonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-66501768589619073372012-02-08T13:38:12.775+00:002012-02-08T13:38:12.775+00:00Quite an achievement in getting someone authoritat...Quite an achievement in getting someone authoritative from Elsevier to talk with the plebs. I have spent years trying to get a "discourse" and effectively been treated with as an inferior being who doesn't merit even the courtesies of replies.<br /><br />I am afraid I have got to the state where I no longer believe any of the things that Elsevier (and many other publishers) say. You caught them out on their self-citation trick - it's full of it. I am going to comment on their principles of content mining http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/intro.cws_home/contentmining - they portray themselves as the saviour of the world "Elsevier wants to support our customers to advance science and health.<br />We want to help them realise the maximum benefit from our content and enhance insight and understanding through content mining." Fantastic! It's just that it's so utterly wrong compared with the way they treated me over 2 years trying to get access to textmining. You can see in this document they are developing a new juicy market - "we'll charge them to read the articles and THEN we'll charge them again to get their machines to read them".<br /><br />Why are so few people upset about this?<br /><br />Peter Murray-RustUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04097697708094731758noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-30408649998415854402012-02-08T12:41:38.338+00:002012-02-08T12:41:38.338+00:00This comment just blew me away: "[W]e don’t b...This comment just blew me away: "[W]e don’t believe that the government should tell authors and publishers what we can do with our publications. "<br /><br />Basically, I'm not even going to read the rest of her answers. My publications are mine and my co-authors and not yours, Elsevier! And quite frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn about what paper I signed that made you think you owned my work.Bjoern Brembshttp://brembs.netnoreply@blogger.com