BMJ Commission on the Future of Academic Medicine must challenge medical publishers to deliver value | The BMJ

"Publishers rely on huge subventions from the public through journal subscriptions and article processing charges paid for by academic institutions and funders. Meanwhile, they also receive payment in kind from publicly funded researchers who write, peer review, and edit their content, almost always free.

This extraordinary business model, in which content is both supplied by and paid for through the public purse, has allowed publishers to become obscenely profitable,2 while also shirking responsibility to adopt measures to tackle publication biases that distort the scientific record.3 The integrity of science is at best a second order concern. This is particularly true for legacy titles, where remaining profitable simply requires maintaining their brand—often achieved by privileging novel or exciting findings over reproducibility and transparency.4

Journals have such a hold over academia, that not only do they obtain content and editorial labour free they even require academics to painstakingly format papers according to idiosyncratic house styles, before even deciding whether it should proceed to peer review.5 This senseless practice alone amounts to millions of pounds worth of researchers’ time wasted each year.67

At a time when many publicly funded health and research systems face unprecedented pressures, such prodigal largesse cannot be justified. The BMJ Commission on the Future of Academic Medicine must demand a better deal for the paying public and recommend measures for governments, funders, and academic institutions to make that happen."