3 ms·
The easy response is to dunk on Nature for rent-seeking. (And it most definitely IS just that). However, the best target for ire is not necessarily the journa
by evancoop 5y ago
The easy response is to dunk on Nature for rent-seeking. (And it most definitely IS just that). However, the best target for ire is not necessarily the journals (even if they charge a lot and provide nothing more than unpaid editors whose value-add is dubious).
The proper target of anger is those who allocate grant money and use the number of publications in a few top-tier journals as the primary credential. Not only does this exclude early-career researchers implicitly (hard to have 50 publications before age 30), but it then forces the payments to a cartel of elite journals.
It ends when grant-writing allows for ANY other assessment of worthiness.
- bell-cot 5y agoThis +10 (if I could). Also target (for anger) those who rank universities by how many "top tier" journal articles their professors have published.
- Agingcoder 5y agoCould it be simply a way for nature of saying 'no, for real, we don't do open access, even if in theory we do'? Basically they don't expect anyone to actually pay for this?