[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- From: Sandy Thatcher <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 19:21:07 EST
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
That's assuming Chicago and MIT pay all their journal editors. I doubt that they do. As for Blackwell and Sage, they can try (and Blackwell at least has), but they can't overcome the obstacle that as commercial publishers they cannot qualify to have their journals be part of the largest electronic database of journals in the humanities and social sciences, Project Muse. Also, as scholars in the humanities and social sciences are acutely aware these days, our journals are priced well below what Blackwell and Sage typically charge. Ask the editor of Philosophy & Public Affairs (a journal I helped found at Princeton) if he is happy with the tripling of the price his journal underwent when Princeton sold it to Blackwell!
Frankly, Sandy, I don't think I would have put that into print. I don't know your journals program, but if something has economic value and I sat at, say, Blackwell or Sage (not to mention MIT or Chicago), I would take your statement as an opportunity to go poaching.
On 2/28/07, Sandy Thatcher <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
I cannot claim to know how commercial or society publishers compensate editors of their journals, but I can tell you that Penn State Press pays not a cent to any of the editors of its 11 journals-and I suspect we are not alone among university press journal publishers. Sandy Thatcher Penn State University PressI just want to comment on one aspect of this posting and ignore Colin's ill-informed financial suppositions about the incomes of the big players. I am sure that he can get a grant to trawl through the returns from the public companies concerned. He and is friends ("a number of us in Australia") are almost certainly misinformed. If I was a journal editor would I tell Colin how much I earned? I would not. I have never worked for Elsevier but I would be amazed if that company do not pay their editors and the editorial infrastructure well and at a rate rising considerably above inflation. My own experience of a publisher is along these lines. I have worked for Academic, OUP, and Chapman & Hall and I now work part-time for Blackwell - though I am not posting for them or from them. I know that all the editors whom I currently deal with get paid. My memory is that this is true of all the hundreds of journals I have published in the past. I am certain that Elsevier is not different from these publishers and I would very surprised if Australia was different in this particular way. I know that there are some self-published society journals where the editor is not paid by the society. I came across one example the other day. However this editor was supported by an impressive paid infrastructure and he agreed that his successor would have to be paid. My own experience of publishing, which is rather greater than that of Colin (now I know a publisher), is that, whereas in the past editors could use the resources of their departments, this is usually no longer the case in most parts of the world and this adds considerably to editorial costs. There are other inflationary factors at work too. Because of the increased pressures of academic life to do research and publish the results, publishers are now frequently expected to "buy-out" consultancy time - at least in those disciplines where consultancy is a fact of life and a reward that supplements poor academic salaries. Anthony Watkinson
- Prev by Date: re: AAUP Statement on Open Access
- Next by Date: RE: message to liblicense-l
- Previous by thread: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- Next by thread: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'