David Worlock | Developing digital strategies for the information marketplace | Supporting the migration of information providers and content players into the networked services world of the future.

"As I finished the account of the revolt by the editors and editorial board of Lingua against Elsevier’s pricing policies ( www.insidehighered.com/news) and the interesting blog by Martin Haspelmath on diamond open access ( Free Science Blog 28 Oct-5 Nov ) I heard , in my mind’s eye , the sound of these junior reseearhers marching outside of the Amsterdam office of Elsevier in November 2020 – or sooner ! Has it really come to this ? And why now ? In all changes associated with digital communications networks , one profile is very marked and certain . Change happens gradually , imperceptibly , until you reach the so-called tipping point . Then it goes suddenly , violently , and way beyond the ability of its promoters to control it . So is that going to happen in science journal publishing ? Or will the need for science journal publishing itself have changed before we decide that publishers are dodos ? Those who are confident that the great houses will outlast us all are still using the “never ” word , which terrifies me . In every digital marketplace I have worked in those who said “never ” about format and business model change went out of business , and while they were very effective yellow pages or local newspaper publishers they grossly underestimated the post tipping point slide  ... And this raises another issue about digital marketplaces . Traditional suppliers cease to be competitors – the ultimate competitor is always the ability of the customer to do things better for himeslf . Thus Elsevier , Wiley , Springer-Nature and their smaller peers are no longer competitors , or certainly not in terms of their big branded journals . Those titles are monopolies . At lower levels there is competition for authors , allegedly , and there can be competition for library budgets . Yet in a world where science research spending has grown through recession , and where the market expenditure has a higher share of research team and individual spending than ever before , there is no competitive pressure on price , which is why the Lingua resignations are so interesting . And note that there is not much pressure on costs either , as long as people like Johann Rooryck are prepared to accept a salary of $5500 for the prestigious role of editing the journal ( its a source of wonderment to me that publishers do not charge academics to be editors …!)  The Lingua people will now do their own thing . LinguOA is now established as a Dutch non-profit trust or stichting, but the idea that sticks with me in this bust up is the role of the funders . The idea , implicit in 'diamond OA' , that funders should acquire or become journal publishers – how many APCs do you need to pay before that becomes feasible – is very attractive in terms of some major players – Gates , Wellcome , Max Planck to name but three . Or are aware and sensible publishers already talking to them about doing deals and ensuring that publishers keep their role as a service industry that understands user needs , not the usurped role of deciding the fate of science communication under the guise of maintaining peer review standards ..."