This is the best article title I've read in a while:
nature.com/articles/s41597-0…
James Butcher retweeted
With the @gatesfoundation no longer paying article-processing charges, what does the future of science publishing look like? My latest for @cenmag: cen.acs.org/policy/publishin… @Journalologist, @JohanRooryck, @jasonpriem @researchremix @cshperspectives @unpaywall #OpenAccess
Research article output in fully OA journals fell by 16% in the first half of this year, compared with the first six months of 2023.
By contrast, hybrid OA grew by 2.7%.
Subscription content was broadly constant.
But that's only part of the story.
(1/n)
Elsevier and Springer Nature have bucked the trend and are doing particularly well.
Elsevier published 14% more research articles in H1 2024 compared with H1 2023.
Springer Nature grew by 18%.
The Empire Strikes Back.
(3/n)
You can read the full analysis in this week's Journalology newsletter:
ck.journalology.com/posts/jo…
Some may think annual reports are dull, but I don't.
Last week Springer Nature released its annual report, which provided details on their operations and profitability.
You can read all about it here:
ck.journalology.com/posts/jo…
So Springer Nature, which has a significant financial incentive to publish more papers, has a high rejection rate.
We focus a lot on corporate profit margins. Perhaps we should focus just as much on the quality of the product we get as tax payers for funding academic research.
James Butcher retweeted
Rishi Sunak is becoming Prime Minister. His family is loaded so caviar and lobster on the menu for me from tomorrow.
James Butcher retweeted
Upcoming Webinar: Perspectives on the Nelson Memo
While the US is moving towards open access, questions remain about the Nelson Memo. Join @acochran12733, @Journalologist, @dylan_ruediger, & @jenchem101 as they discuss the impact of this new policy tinyurl.com/3s59zk52
I’ve been thinking about @eLife's announcement over the weekend, in particular the business model.
tl;dr the new model will increase revenues by 150% and costs by 33%.
(caveat: back-of-the-envelope calculation)
A 🧵
Of course, that assumes that submissions don’t drop over time, which could happen if academics don’t understand or appreciate the unusual model.
Please correct me if I’ve made any mistakes here @damianpattinson




