The SF Chronicle reports that two UCSF scientists are leading a boycott of six journals published by Cell Press, a division of Reed-Elsevier. The immediate cause of the boycott is that Cell wants the UC system to pay $90,000 for electronic subscriptions to the six journals, and the scientists regard that as exorbitant.
A few things stand out about the boycott.
It is being supported by the university administration. The vice dean of research and the vice chancellor of academic affairs at UCSF are quoted in the article supporting the boycott. This is not just the kind of peasant revolt that I’ve occasionally encouraged.
I don’t know enough about the area to judge whether this is accurate, but one of the journals being targetted, Cell is described in the article as a ‘must-read’ journal. It looks like this is no mere skirmish over third-tier publications. We’ll see how serious the scientists really are when they have to decide whether to boycott the New England Journal of Medicine, or The Lancet if similar disputes arise. But if Cell did publish important work on AIDS in recent years, as the article says, this is already an important dispute.
Finally, this isn’t something that can be solved by going electronic, because the dispute is over the cost of electronic subscriptions. I know UC is a big system, and it’s fair that they should pay more than your average site for a licence, but $90,000 for six journals still seems ridiculous, especially if they are not available unbundled, and really only one of the six is strongly wanted.
Thanks to Kent Bach for passing along this link.
I’m not familiar with the others in the boycott package, but Cell really is a must-read if you’re in the field. When my wife was doing a molecular-cellular biology fellowship a handful of years ago, Cell was the target of all the top-tier research in that area. My sense is that a boycott of Cell by scientists who do relevant work would be rather equivalent in significance to a boycott of The New England Journal of Medicine by medical researchers.
There’s been a boycott by many in theoretical high energy physics of the Elsevier journal Nuclear Physics B. I heard it joked once that the new building at the Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, was built in part from the endowment money that was used to pay for the NPB subscription.
In physics, of course, we have the ArXiv so we don’t need journals so much. There are also plenty of other journals like JHEP and PRD, also.
With sites like this their may be alternatives http://www.plosbiology.org.
I’m not sure where the 90K goes but 15 grand a year per journal eats up a bunch of research.
This would be a very significant development if it comes to pass. Cell and the other journals in this group are top notch. I work at a University that cannot afford all - we do not get Molecular Cell. Time and again, I have to order poor quality fax copies of papers from it. And teaching senior level courses is hindered by an inability to get figures for used in lectures.
Speak of the devil—Cell was the journal at which I was a copy editor, as I mentioned in the comments to Chris’s thread on Norman.
If you look at the call to boycott, you’ll see that UCSF makes what I think is an excellent point: Cell Press jourmals are immensely profitable, and they derive their worth from the uncompensated labor of academics—those who review papers for them, serve on their editorial boards, and submit papers to them. (When I was there, authors had to pay to publish in Neuron though not in Cell.)
This is a point that Kent Bach made earlier in one of Brian’s threads. Academics need journals to disseminate their work and to credential them (the old publish or perish), but there’s no reason that those journals have to be for-profit enterprises. If the publisher is profiting from the journal, why should academics help them pile up cash?
(Copy editors, of course, were compensated, though not well.)
Cell, its value, and the price may not be the issue. What is, however, might be more closely tied to the revenue lost through electronic distribution. This is not trivial for E-publishers. Even if excessive profits at the expense of underpaid (or unpaid) researchers was factored in.
Before E, one paid for a paper copy. Yes, it was pretty easy to make photocopies. But of an entire issue? Hardly — though possible.
So we passed around a handful of key articles. Some of us made photocopies of copies. But in reality, if you wanted to be “on top”, well you justified a subscription on that very point. “I don’t want to wait to get in the loop, just so I can make a copy of a copy”. Department heads would fold. Budgets would be adjusted. Those who had a need would get their subscription.
Today, I can convert nearly anything to PDF, and pass it around. To anyone I want. Anytime. In any quantity. I usually don’t – that’s not to say that I don’t receive articles (usually worthless) from others who regularly do.
The publishers aren’t stupid. If you don’t price for the enterprise – you’re going to find that the masses (albeit educated ones) are buying limited subscriptions, then copying, pasting and PDFing copies to their peers, in or out of house. Why buy a site license, when you can license a handful of employees then simply E-copy everything else.
And, so, it all comes down to economics – including, if you will, the value of exploitation and competition. If Cell is consistently top-notch, then Reed-Elsevier wins. If Cell can’t keep it’s audience because alternatives become equally respected (or nearly so), then market economics change.
So it appears that Reed-Elsevier is putting their reputation on the line. If they are as good as $90,000 will buy, then they’ll continue at that price point or higher. If the researchers who must pay to get in the door choose to vote with their feet (er… postage stamps) then Reed-Elsevier will either have to compete, perish, or be relegated to niche status.
So, USCF boycotts. That’s irrelevant. Unless, of course, hundreds of others do. And there are solid alternative sources. Which are reasonably respected. And which grab a sizeable audience. And that, my friends, is called capitalism (or is it freedom? I forget).
The USCF boycott isn’t “irrelevant” - by doing this and announcing it they help build momentum in their discipline for a break away from the publishers and their business model (usually “squeeze them until the pips squeak” as far as anyone can tell). Physics has already begun divorce proceedings, my branch of applied maths appears to be thinking about a trial separation, and others will surely follow. And hoorah for that!
Shades of Richard Stallman! Oh, wait, he’s not dead… The guy’s a pain, and I don’t like his writing…but he’s a brilliant software engineer, and a moderately effective political activist, and it sure looks like he called this one.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review