[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Future of the "subscription model?"
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: RE: Future of the "subscription model?"
- From: Sandy Thatcher <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:35:38 EST
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
As someone who was connected with Penn State for 20 years, i think there is something to be said for moral outrage effecting change, too. Sandy Thatcher At 9:53 PM -0500 11/14/11, Hamaker, Charles wrote: >Joe Esposito said in this string: > >"Many of the tactics used to effect change are pointless, the >expression of moral outrage among them. " > > >I'd like to speak up for moral outrage. There are instances >where it is perfectly usable and legitimate, not pointless as >Joe states. > >The moral outrage of the mid 80's when UK publisher's were found >to be charging U.S. libraries two to three times the rate they >were charging the rest of the world was neither pointless nor >useless. I suspect that if we understood world pricing dynamics >a bit better, that we would find that U.S. deals with publishers >are being used to subsidize the rest of the world once again, as >I am receiving reports from colleagues worldwide of total >journal run Cost Per Use studies that document prices half or >less what U.S. libraries are paying. An official of one of the >major physics publishers stated in a public conference that >worldwide the CPU for his journals was $2.00 a download. My CPU >for that publisher is $20.00 a download. > >I suspect that when we assimilate Year of Publication data a bit >(COUNTER JR5) you will see another wave of outrage that could >have real impact on how researchers and libraries behave. And >ultiamtely on publishers. What if I told you for example, that I >suspect that some publisher's pricing to libraries for Year of >Publication use is in the neighborhood of $1,200 dollars an >article for current year use of current output? That's what we >are actually paying for,( current use), with our subscription >dollars: the past year's use is sunk cost. > >Since books are running about $60.00 a volume right now (any >update on that figure is welcome if I"m out of date) is there >any way in talking with Rick'Anderson's Associate Dean that the >conversation might just change if Rick could demonstrate current >year costs of $3,000 an article for individual journals --a >figure I've seen in some of my analysis? How inefficient does a >system have to be before it can be demonstrated that it is >either corrupt or just plain destructive to the goals of the >participants? And what responses should there be. > >I believe and know from personal experience that moral outrage >is a powerful persuader if the data backing it are sound, the >logic impeccable. It can be the critical factor that moves us >from so what to what if, to concrete action. In fact I doubt any >concrete action will be taken radically changing the journal >system as it is right now without moral outrage or moral >susasion. > >Chuck Hamaker >UNC Charlotte