The one science reform we can all agree on, but we're too cowardly to do

peter.suber's bookmarks 2026-03-06

Summary:

"Nothing about this system [academic publishing] makes sense, which is why I think we should build a new one. In the meantime, though, we should also fix the old one. But that’s hard, for two reasons. First, many people are invested in things working exactly the way they do now, so every stupid idea has a constituency behind it. Second, our current administration seems to believe in policy by bloodletting: if something isn’t working, just slice it open at random. Thanks to these haphazard cuts and cancellations, we now have a system that is both dysfunctional and anemic.

I see a way to solve both problems at once. We can satisfy both the scientists and the scalpel-wielding politicians by ridding ourselves of the one constituency that should not exist. Of all the crazy parts of our crazy system, the craziest part is where taxpayers pay for the research, then pay private companies to publish it, and then pay again so scientists can read it. We may not agree on much, but we can all agree on this: it is time, finally and forever, to get rid of for-profit scientific publishers."

Link:

https://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-one-science-reform-we-can-all

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.new oa.publishing oa.recommendations oa.nonprofit oa.profits oa.publishers

Date tagged:

03/06/2026, 09:53

Date published:

03/06/2026, 04:53