There’s Been a Murder

The reader-focused journals world has been left for dead, two guys think they'll tackle scientific AI, and BMJ Medicine struggles with open peer-review

There’s Been a Murder

For centuries, the implicit goal of scholarly and scientific publishers was to serve a community of interested readers with relevant, quality information — until 2000, when suddenly the conceptualization shifted, and the idea of the community-oriented, reader-focused journal was replaced with the concept of an author-oriented, funder-focused, article-filled substitute. Those peddling the shambolic substitute hoped nobody would notice the swap.

As of today, the idea of serving communities and readers — and, through them, society — is, in many areas of scientific and scholarly pursuit, basically comatose, if not entirely dead. Those of us who have been paying attention can follow a trail of clues left behind by the perpetrators, as well as describe and identify the rattling avatar of what once was the reader-focused journal — the mega-journal, the preprint server, the predatory publisher, the exploitative publisher, the mega-publisher, the cascade.

While the body still animates in ways that appear normal, we know it is an automaton, a puppet of funders and authors as much as a living, breathing entity informed by editorial, practitioner, and community needs.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

Subscribe to The Geyser

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.