• howrar@lemmy.ca
    ·
    3 months ago

    Academic Authors: $0

    FAKE NEWS

    This should be in the negatives. We have to pay to get papers published in these traditional journals.

  • banana_havoc@lemm.ee
    ·
    3 months ago

    Reviewers and writers actually do get a stipend, but it's a token amount like 200 bucks a year. This industry is the most ass backward incentive structure we could possibly create, the only reason writers would provide articles to a journal is literally for the clout.

    • cassowary@lemm.ee
      ·
      3 months ago

      Really? I’ve reviewed and published a good chunk of papers and never received any financial compensation.

    • blackbrook@mander.xyz
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      They all got bought up by venture capitalists like a decade or more more ago, and this is the result.

      They were already backward, but now they are backward, ruthless about cost cutting, and care about nothing but profits.

    • Bloobish [comrade/them]
      ·
      3 months ago

      Clout and also many academic focused universities expect some set minimum of publications from their staff

  • TheChemist [he/him]
    ·
    3 months ago

    I heard that, you are legally allowed to Email the Academic Authors, and request said articles, which they are allowed to provide for free.

    • cassowary@lemm.ee
      ·
      3 months ago

      Absolutely. Plus scientists love when people want to actually read their work so you make their day too!

  • eldain@feddit.nl
    ·
    3 months ago

    I too want to open a business where both customers and suppliers pay me. Do you know any more gullible sectors? Academics are pretty extorted already it seems.

  • shastaxc@lemm.ee
    ·
    3 months ago

    Why are we looking at revenue? We don't know the operating costs. What are the profit margins?

    • bubbalu [they/them]
      ·
      3 months ago

      Alright but look at how much they pay the authors. What other business pays ZERO dollars for their core product?

      • tetris11@lemmy.ml
        ·
        3 months ago

        None, but science isn't a business. Treating it so creates perverse incentives where an articles is reviewed by merit of its financial gain and not its content. Some people already do this by prestige alone, but adding money to the mix won't improve this imo

        • bubbalu [they/them]
          ·
          3 months ago

          So it's acceptable for Elselvier et al to milk academics blind? At the minimum, authors should not be charged.

          • tetris11@lemmy.ml
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, but ideally all publishers should operate not-for-profit, and yep submission for open access should not cost ridiculous fees.

  • wren@feddit.uk
    ·
    3 months ago

    I've only ever published in open access journals (partially because I've only got 3 papers out, but also out of preference) is it just prestige that makes people go with pay-to-view journals? or are there other factors?

  • D61 [any]
    ·
    3 months ago

    Before Roblox there was this...