Anti-OA spin on Inside Higher Ed (was from Inside Higher Ed)

[Heather Morrison <hgmorris@sfu.ca>]

Why the spin? According to the information provided in Inside 
Higher Ed, OUP has a stable rate of participation in Oxford Open 
for journals that have been participating for a while, and a 
lower rate of participation for journals that have just joined 
the program - hardly surprising, as the journals that were most 
keen to participate were likely part of the original group. Why 
add the numbers and spin this as if it were decreasing 
participation? If a statement like this were made in an article 
submitted to a journal for peer review, any journal worth its 
salt would refuse to publish the article unless the statement 
were revised. Note that I cannot find any such press release on 
the Oxford University Press site. My comment on the Inside Higher 
Ed site requests the original release to which this Quick Take is 
referring.

Stevan Harnad explains another slant, the focus on gold rather 
than green OA, on Open Access Archivangelism: 
http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/741-Highly-Misleading-Press-Release-by-Oxford-University-Press-Journals.html

A copy of the relevant text and links can be found on my blog, 
at: 
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2010/06/anti-oa-spin-on-inside-higher-ed.html

Heather Morrison, MLIS
The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com