A Lack of Consumer Protection
Today’s main incentives drive information to the public before its ready or safe
Note: We discuss these podcast episodes in the introduction to this week’s pod:
Episode Overview
A recent press release from Springer Nature — gussied up to pretend it was a “white paper” representing “findings” and pushed right out through Research Information, where press releases go for release — provided a litany of incentives being pursued by the author-pays Gold OA publishers these days:
- Citations
- Downloads
- Attention
However, these are not reliable incentives. Some work against OA publisher finances. Each one has been hacked to death. All three are meaningless to whether the scientific claims being made are important or reliable.
Worse, they reveal a rejection of the duty of care the scientific enterprise has in relationship with the public.
Today, we talk about the lack of consumer protection in scientific publishing and its negative effects, why editorial and peer review done right protect both fellow scientists and the public by engaging communities of experts, and why something unbiased and unhackable might make sense as a priority for those who care.
We also share our “Discoveries of the Week,” including this one:
Clarissa Brincat
Subscribe to our podcast
- Subscribe on Apple Podcasts
- Subscribe on Spotify
- Subscribe on Amazon Music/Audible
- Subscribe on YouTube
Music provided by Provoke the Truth — https://provokethetruth.net/
