Research Community Interests and the Publishing Lobby's Latest Trojan Horse (CHORUS)

Pikas, Christina K. Christina.Pikas at JHUAPL.EDU
Tue Jul 23 08:50:43 EDT 2013

The vast majority of OA advocates are not anti-publisher exactly but are justifiably skeptical of publishers' motivations, activities, and proposals.

This proposal is not a healthy one for scholarly communication, in my opinion. The mandate is between the funders and the fundees and the publishers are third party contractors. The US federal government often likes to push off work to contractors that is inherently governmental and that should be done by (less biased) government employees.

The publishers' proposal may be an easier route to go and might be attractive with the lobbying and the advocates like you pushing it, but in the long run the publishers serve their own bottom lines (as they should in a market economy) and not necessarily the best interests of scholarly communication. The products of federally funded research are too important to let sit and should be in repositories run by the funders and/or fundees.

This is all in my opinion and is not the position of my employer (or anyone else, for that matter).

Christina Pikas

-----Original Message-----
From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at] On Behalf Of David Wojick
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Research Community Interests and the Publishing Lobby's Latest Trojan Horse (CHORUS)

What Federal system design arguments have I not responded to? It is not an ad hominem to point out that the Federal policy is not anti-publisher, as many OA advocates are. It is an important fact about the policy. I have to be repetitive because Harnad is presenting the same non-design arguments over and over. Arguments such as that publishers cannot be trusted, access should be immediate via institutional repositories, delayed access is not open access, etc. My response does not vary.

David Wojick

On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:33 AM, Cristóbal Palmer <cmp at CMPALMER.ORG> wrote:

> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> On Tuesday, July 23, 2013 at 7:05 AM, David Wojick wrote:
>> Your personal dislike of publishers is not a system design argument, nor is it Federal policy.  
> Your personal inability to stay focused on the arguments presented and reliance instead on ad hominem plus repetition isn't a system design argument either.
> Thanks,
> --  
> Cristóbal Palmer

More information about the SIGMETRICS mailing list