43 ms·
> Elsevier argues that there is more to publishing than simply shovelling papers online and that work such as editing and arranging for reviews has to be paid f
by shock 9y ago
> Elsevier argues that there is more to publishing than simply shovelling papers online and that work such as editing and arranging for reviews has to be paid for.
It's funny how
arranging for reviews has to be paid for, but the work of reviewing doesn't.
- jjoonathan 9y agoNot just reviews. Elsevier doesn't fund any of the scientific work, but it didn't stop the article from comparing them to record companies and film studios in the very first sentence.
- ocschwar 9y agoThat really infuriates me. In the fields where I worked, I've had to read dozens of papers by teams from Turkey, China, the Slavic countries, and other places. People whose command of their field was far ahead of their command of English. People who submitted to Elsevier. And whose papers received no amount of copy-editing whatsoever. It was so bad, you could tell the authors' nationality by their grammar errors. Slavs would drop the definite and indefinite articles. Turks would refer to people as "it." Chinese authors would mix plural and singular inappropriately. If they just spent a minimum on copy editing, I would pay the fees on every paper I needed. But they didn't even have the decency to do that.