Re: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors

["Anthony Watkinson" <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>]

I do not know why David Goodman writes with such confidence that 
the "editor receives only expenses". Maybe this is what happens 
in the case of US learned society publishers but my own 
experience in university press and commercial publishing is that, 
in the case of STM journals, there is almost always a distinction 
between expenses and what is often called an "honorarium". This 
fee in the case of established journals can be quite substantial. 
I certainly know LIS journals that work like this and I am sure 
readers of this posting who edit such journals will be aware of 
this too.

Anthony Watkinson

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>; <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 11:31 PM
Subject: RE: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors

> Scholarly journal publishers do not add value through peer 
> review. The peer-reviewers add value through peer-review. The 
> editor adds value by managing the peer review.
>
> They both do this for prestige, not money--the peer-reviewers 
> are normally unpaid, and the editor receives only expenses 
> (which might be substantial for the very largest journals.)
>
> To the extent that the publisher contributes to this (aside 
> from paying the expenses of the editor) they contribute by 
> appointing a good editor.
>
> To the extent that
>
>> the consequent association of a journal's brand and reputation
>> (including "rank" by measures such as ISI Impact Factor
>
> adds value, the value is derived from the other articles. The 
> editor is responsible for most of this: the consistent value of 
> the journal from year to year depends on the editor, or the 
> succession of editors, and their success in finding good 
> authors.
>
> The publisher is not responsible for any of this, or for any 
> other aspect of the scholarly quality of the journal. The IF 
> depends upon the articles, not the publisher--the highest 
> levels of IF in almost all subjects is attained by very 
> different types of publisher.
>
> The publisher is responsible for coordinating the different 
> technical and editorial processes. The publisher is responsible 
> for distribution; positively for good distribution, negatively 
> for impeding it. Publishers who establish prices that only a 
> hundred or so libraries can pay impede the distribution. 
> Publishers who delay the posting of OA copies impede the 
> distribution.
>
> It is the responsibility of the publishers to find a business 
> model that does not impede the distribution. It is not the 
> responsibility of the libraries to arrange this for them. It is 
> not the responsibility of the authors, or of the readers. 
> When an author or library pays them, this distribution is what 
> they are being paid for.
>
> Those publishers who can only obstruct, should get out of the 
> way. If some do not, it is in the end the ultimate 
> responsibility of the authors, libraries and readers to find 
> those who can.
>
> Dr. David Goodman
> Associate Professor
> Palmer School of Library and Information Science
> Long Island University
> dgoodman@liu.edu
>
> (I do not intend this as a response to BM personally; she is
> obliged by her position to defend both the worthy and less worthy
> members of her association.)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Barbara Meredith
> Sent: Tue 7/11/2006 9:37 PM
> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Subject: FW: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors
>
> Scholarly publishers of peer-reviewed journals add value in the
> course of investing in the oversight of the process of expert
> peer review, and the consequent association of a journal's brand
> and reputation (including "rank" by measures such as ISI Impact
> Factor) with an author's work. That is transformative value for
> the author, who can leverage the published work as proof that the
> research conducted was judged to be sufficiently authoritative
> and significant as to merit additional grant funding or other
> recognition. The additional value that is added by scientific
> publishers who undertake copyediting, proofreading, formatting,
> and dissemination in print and online (with adherence to
> bibliographic and online linking standards that enable reliable
> archiving and discovery)is added primarily for the benefit of the
> customer and reader, but is also a service to the author.
> Publishers do thereby enhance also the accuracy of scientific
> communications, as well as provide for information dissemination
> and archiving in a fashion that adheres to library and industry
> standards.
>
> Barbara J. Meredith
> Vice President
> Professional/Scholarly Publishing
> Association of American Publishers, Inc.
> New York, NY 10003 USA
> bmeredith@publishers.org
> www.pspcentral.org
> www.publishers.org