Post #2433596
2024-03-28 23:01 UTC
@Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org @brembs@mastodon.social The irony is that APCs gave Open Access a tremendous boost when they were first introduced. It is the commercial exploitation by many publishers of authors' (and funders', institutions') 'need' to have their papers accepted for publication in 'peer-reviewed' journals, yet freely available to anyone, that causes the problem, with vastly inflated APCs trumping knowledge sharing.
Replies (1)
-
@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz 2024-03-29 10:52
@villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org @brembs@mastodon.social If the aim to replace subscription journals isn't realised, refusing APCs entirely will set the clock back 20 years. Stevan Harnad's Subversive Proposal of 1994 envisaged self-archiving causing subscriptions to wither away, but without success. Beware the law of unintended consequences!