Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Friday, May 08, 2009

More comments on Elsevier's fake journal

For background, see our original post.

Jonathan Rochkind:

... I suggest that Elsevier needs to get a message from libraries that selling itís imprint to the highest bidder will hurt their bottom line. We ought not to spend huge money (and we do spend HUGE money) for questionably legitimate products from a publisher of ill repute.

If Elsevier was willing to prostitute their imprint once, how many more fake journals may also be included in their catalog, and in ScienceDirect? ...

Dorothea Salo:

... Iíve heard representatives of scholarly journal publishers talk in grave tones about the importance of their brands. Why arenít they jumping up and down in fury at Elsevier right now? Because how can they say that any more without the rest of us chortling about Elsevier the journal gigolo? ...

Bill Hooker:

... Jonathan says "WorldCat lists 50 publications by Excerpta Medica Communications"; I just tried a simple author search for that phrase and got only 21 results, including the recently-exposed-as-fake Australasian journal of bone & joint medicine; how many others are fake? How about the other fourteen "Australasian Journal of" titles in the same list ...

Why, for one thing, are none of them indexed by Science Direct? ...

John Hunter:

... As I have said the journals fighting open science should have their credibility questioned. They are putting their outdated business model above science. We should not see organizations that are focused on closing science research through deceptive publicity efforts and lobbying efforts as credible.