Tim Lougheed, New online medical journal challenges conventions, Canadian Medical Association Journal, October 12, 2004. On the upcoming launch of PLoS Medicine. Excerpt: "Whether this [upfront] funding model is sustainable is something PLoS intends to discover. Observers at other journals insist that the up-front charge is too low to maintain a high calibre of editing and presentation. Barbara Cohen, senior editor for PLoS, says additional revenue could come from educational grants as well as carefully defined forms of advertising, nor does she rule out increasing the author fee. 'At the moment we think that this is a figure that is reasonable,' she says. 'We will have to learn over time whether it's realistic.' Meanwhile, PloS has a US$9-million start-up grant from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Cohen says the online publication movement points to a need for systemic change, where science funders understand that 'the publication charge...should become an integral part of doing the research.' That change is starting to take hold. Last month, the US National Institutes of Health proposed a new policy of insisting on free Internet access for papers based on work funded by the agency, regardless of whether that work appears in a paid subscription journal. The NIH argues that public funds paid for this work, and members of the public should not have to pay to read about it." (Thanks to Charles W. Bailey, Jr.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 10/12/2004 03:56:00 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.
