This is a preprint of my November column "Focus on Publishing" in Information Today....
Anyone who reads this column knows that I take on topics on Open Access (OA) frequently, increasingly frequently as OA events are occurring at an almost staggering rate. With the launch of Partnership for Research Integrity in Science & Medicine (PRISM) and some other events over the past couple of months, I have been quite peppered with questions. So, here is my salt to the dialog....
[I]t is unclear how representative PRISM is of the views of its member publishers, many of whom are engaged is some form of OA --even if it is just providing delayed access....
The publishing lobby has always been an obstacle to OA but OA started happening anyway. They are putting a higher gloss on the rhetoric but you have to remember that the publishing lobby has always had access to spin-doctors. Just try to interview a major publishing figure without their PR person listening in on the other line. OA came from much more humble roots (as in grassroots) in terms of message but its sophistication has grown. The Alliance for Taxpayer Access is one example that particularly stands out because the organizational members bring their own lobbying and PR knowledge to the discussion.
However, I think PRISM also represents the fact that the OA message is reaching beyond the usual “suspects” and they are seeking to capitalize on the fact that, sadly, people will accept spin without looking to see if there is any factual information to back it up. Frankly I have found it strange that an industry that claims to bank itself on facts are not offering much in the way of facts, particularly peer-reviewed research, to support their arguments. I defer to Peter Suber’s September issue of the Open Access Newsletter, where he outlines this in much greater detail than I have space to do here. Newcomers to OA will find this journey down the road already traveled (and traveled over again) very useful....
We already have OA and peer review is intact. The PRISM members know this as they have members who already allow the same type of OA that the National Institute of Health (NIH) puts forth as the mandate for the research it funds....The “sky is falling on peer review” is a fear tactic....
“Stop OA and everything will be okay” may well be the unofficial motto of PRISM (okay, I made up the motto) but this is like Microsoft campaigning to make Google go away....
Comment. You don't see this everyday: an OA preprint of a newspaper column, and one about OA to boot. Kudos to Robin for trying it and to Information Today for allowing it.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 10/05/2007 08:27:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
