Missing the Point on Open Access « In the Dark

abernard102@gmail.com 2013-01-30


" ... I have got time today for a quick comment on an article I saw in yesterday’s Observer. The piece tries argue  that the government’s plans for Open Access, stemming from the Finch Report, amount to an “attack on academic freedoms”, a stance apparently held by a number of eminent historians (and others). The argument is that the Gold Open Access model preferred by RCUK will require the payment of Article Processing Charges (APCs) which could in some cases amount to thousands of pounds per article. Departmental budget holders (possibly administrators rather than academics) will then have to be involved in decisions about which papers can be funded and which can’t. This, it is argued, will mean that researchers will have much less freedom to publish when, where and what they like – the people holding the purse strings will have the final say. A similar point was made by Mike Cruise in a strange article that appeared in the latest Astronomy and Geophysics (house organ of the Royal Astronomical Society): 'Even in the UK it is not clear how the flow of funding for APCs will work. Will universities limit an academic’s publication rate or where he or she can publish? How and by whom will this funding be controlled? Academic freedom may, perversely, be curtailed as a result of open access.'  So does Open Access pose a real threat to academic freedom? ..."



From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com


oa.new oa.gold oa.business_models oa.publishers oa.comment oa.mandates oa.green oa.universities oa.arxiv oa.uk oa.costs oa.humanities oa.prices oa.funders oa.fees oa.rcuk oa.funds oa.debates oa.colleges oa.stem oa.repositories oa.hei oa.policies oa.ssh oa.journals

Date tagged:

01/30/2013, 13:33

Date published:

01/30/2013, 08:33