RE: Who gets hurt by Open Access?

["Peter Banks" <pbanks@diabetes.org>]

David Goodman:  "Your journal is indeed not subsidized directly by
government funding, but every dollar of its revenue is derived from
government sources, or stimulated by government activity and tax policy. "

This is simply untrue--and it is untrue for most journals in clinical
medicine.

DG:  "The authors pay it from their grants, which typically specifically
provide for the use of part of the funds for this purpose."

Please look at the funding sources for our authors. Fewer than half are
government funded. The largest single source of funding is private
industry.

DG:  "It receives some at the subscriber side. These grants also provide
for indirect costs. A portion of the indirect costs goes to the library "

The MAJORITY of our subscribers (especially for Diabetes Care) are
individuals, not libraries. Many are association members, many of whom pay
for membership personally. The tax deduction subscribers and members
receive doesn't begin to cover the actual out-of-pocket expenditure.

DG:  "practitioners who account for many of your subscriptions are
additionally supported by state and federal money through Medicare and the
like."

David, you're really stretching now, suggesting that a physician who
receives Medicare payments is in some way receiving a subsidy to purchase
journals. By this line of reasoning, he or she is also receiving a subsidy
to buy a Lexus.

You want to imply that a switch from subscription based to funder-pays
publishing is simply a shift of one form of government funding to another.
This is utterly false. OA represents the government assuming the costs of
publishing now in large part borne by private parties. If you want to
advocate for a government takeover of publishing, be honest about it,
please.

Peter Banks
Publisher
American Diabetes Association
1701 North Beauregard Street
Alexandria, VA 22311
703/299-2033
FAX 703/683-2890
Email: pbanks@diabetes.org