PLOS to move away from APC model. PLOS moves designed to make publishing equitable.
https://plos.org/redefining-publishing/
#ScientificPublishing #AcademicSky #AcademicChatter
https://plos.org/redefining-publishing/
#ScientificPublishing #AcademicSky #AcademicChatter
Comments
As you say, that's fine, but how? And how in a way that can be generalised across multiple publishers, many without philanthropic support?
But interesting to watch - experiments are good!
In EMBO's case, I wrote up the transparent costs feature a few yrs ago. The main single item in publication costs is human resources, most notably competent scientific editors
But there are other publishing angels out there eg
@biologists.bsky.social (NB another former chair conflict of interest!)
@richardsever.bsky.social at CSHL Press
@rockupress.bsky.social
@elife.bsky.social (quite radically...)
...and others
https://www.embo.org/podcasts/a-steppingstone-to-an-open-science-future-embo-press-moves-to-full-open-access/
I assume they are talking about a more radical change in business model than that, but let's watch this space
My take (and some context) on why even these light/bon-existant details are actually quite big. PLOS publicly taking a position that APCs as a model doesn't work is quite a signal to the broader #AcademicPublishing system.
APC: allophycocyanin
Someone living in their microcosmos.
It's worth talking about how APCs are no better than subscription model for health of science. And IMO they're worse bc they tie profit to Narticles published.
Also see:
https://bsky.app/profile/hansonmark.bsky.social/post/3lcd67gudhm2e