4 ms·

I’ve always thought that a more reasonable model for academic publishing would be to disconnect the availability of the content from the peer review / “publishi

I’ve always thought that a more reasonable model for academic publishing would be to disconnect the availability of the content from the peer review / “publishing”. Couldn’t the PDF’s be hosted in the open, in a repository similar to arXiv, and then be “published”. Being published would then just basically mean that your paper gets tagged in the repository as “Published in Journal of X”, almost like a Twitter verification mark but more granular [0]. Some publishing fees would remain, and pay for the curation and costs associated with the peer review. [0]: Of course the journal could still be compiled and published separately as well.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Vinnl 7y ago
Sure, and those are usually referred to as "overlay journals". They exist, but the thing that has been keeping the entire system in place now is how existing journals have a reputation upon which the academic career evaluation process is built. That allows publishers to charge ridiculous amounts of money, so they're quite keen on the current situation. More here: https://medium.com/flockademic/the-ridiculous-number-that-can-make-or-break-academic-careers-704e00ae070a https://medium.com/flockademic/the-ridiculous-number-that-ca...