6 ms·

I think you drastically overestimate the quality of the books this article talks about. These publishers will publish any rubbish you give them just to profit f

I think you drastically overestimate the quality of the books this article talks about. These publishers will publish any rubbish you give them just to profit from selling to librarians who do not understand enough of the subject matter to know they are being scammed. I've been contacted on Facebook by these scam publishers, inquiring if I'd like to publish some of my university essays. There are plenty of alternatives. Most of the niche knowledge is distributed via scientific journals and conference proceedings. And many scientific publishers will happily publish books on any obscure topic, if you pay for printing. Scientific publishing has plenty of problems, but these kinds of "publishers" are the worst; they leech off already stretched library budgets for short term profits without providing any value to society at all.

patio11 11y ago
I don't think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence these publishers will do. I think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence done by any publisher on any title picked at random from a university library. Peer review is, like Santa, a story we tell to motivate little children; academics (particularly in the humanities) are their own QC departments. And many scientific publishers will happily publish books on any obscure topic, if you pay for printing. I feel like I have to say "I do not understand the relevance of this fact to the claim that the academic press is a staunch bulwark against incorrect facts receiving its imprimatur."
- jakobegger 11y ago
  I agree that a lot of low quality work is published even with peer review. But I don't think publishers should be gatekeepers; it's generally impossible to judge the quality of academic work without being heavily invested in the field yourself. So I don't have a problem with publishing rubbish as long as you pay for it yourself. What I do have a problem with is that these people try to collect anything that they can get their fingers on, put an ISBN on it, and then sell it to libraries at horrendous prices. This is not about making knowledge accessible, this is solely about scraping a bit off library budgets with the least amount of effort. (Edit: language)
- librvf 11y ago
  I don't think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence these publishers will do Which publishers? If this is a real problem, there might be real solutions but those won't be found if we are busy debating narratives without digging down into the details.
- jordanpg 11y ago
  I think it's pretty clear from context that the author is referring to junk scholarship, or something pretty close to it. If a book really is written and then forgotten by the world, it was never a serious part of the discussion. And a discussion, however small, is what academia is.
- Steuard 11y ago
  Even if you're cynical about peer review, there is a world of difference between a publisher that sends manuscripts to subject experts that it identifies on its own and a publisher that (as in the article) asks the author if they have any friends who could take care of the reviewing. I've served as a reviewer for textbook chapters before. Maybe I'm the exception, but I took that responsibility seriously (and sent at least one back with a "don't even think of publishing this without a complete rewrite" response).
librvf 11y ago
> I've been contacted on Facebook by these scam publishers Which publishers? If they are scams they should be exposed. The linked article included no verifiable details.

patio11 11y ago

I don't think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence these publishers will do. I think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence done by any publisher on any title picked at random from a university library. Peer review is, like Santa, a story we tell to motivate little children; academics (particularly in the humanities) are their own QC departments. And many scientific publishers will happily publish books on any obscure topic, if you pay for printing. I feel like I have to say "I do not understand the relevance of this fact to the claim that the academic press is a staunch bulwark against incorrect facts receiving its imprimatur."

jakobegger 11y ago
I agree that a lot of low quality work is published even with peer review. But I don't think publishers should be gatekeepers; it's generally impossible to judge the quality of academic work without being heavily invested in the field yourself. So I don't have a problem with publishing rubbish as long as you pay for it yourself. What I do have a problem with is that these people try to collect anything that they can get their fingers on, put an ISBN on it, and then sell it to libraries at horrendous prices. This is not about making knowledge accessible, this is solely about scraping a bit off library budgets with the least amount of effort. (Edit: language)
librvf 11y ago
I don't think we disagree very much about the likely level of subject-specific due diligence these publishers will do Which publishers? If this is a real problem, there might be real solutions but those won't be found if we are busy debating narratives without digging down into the details.
jordanpg 11y ago
I think it's pretty clear from context that the author is referring to junk scholarship, or something pretty close to it. If a book really is written and then forgotten by the world, it was never a serious part of the discussion. And a discussion, however small, is what academia is.
Steuard 11y ago
Even if you're cynical about peer review, there is a world of difference between a publisher that sends manuscripts to subject experts that it identifies on its own and a publisher that (as in the article) asks the author if they have any friends who could take care of the reviewing. I've served as a reviewer for textbook chapters before. Maybe I'm the exception, but I took that responsibility seriously (and sent at least one back with a "don't even think of publishing this without a complete rewrite" response).

librvf 11y ago

> I've been contacted on Facebook by these scam publishers Which publishers? If they are scams they should be exposed. The linked article included no verifiable details.