I agree the context is quite helpful and I understand better where Adi has been coming from, but the argument was not that no one should "pick on" the PLoS journals.
The best articulation in my mind is: it's important to share the context early and be clear what criticisms we are serving Open Access journals because language = power. It is a reality that negative assumptions of Open Access journals (some of which happen to share the same vocabulary as the original comment) are propagated by and tossed about in academic circles. IMHO this is no fear, it is reality. In the end, I think this was a good discussion to have on the cusp of Open Access Week: http://www.openaccessweek.org/ (and I do hope it is considered as such, I think we've gotten to share a lot of perspectives and resources through this!) Any chapters holding events for OA Week? I'm working on an event with the library and Nick Shockey with the Right to Research Coalition. Drawing up marketing stuff tonight. - Matt > On Wed, 29 Sep 2010, Adi Kamdar wrote: > >> This email from a professor I've talked to—where I got the dumping >> ground quote—may help. Sure it's not 100% positive, but I believe that >> academic opinions about the realities of the scholarly world are to be >> taken into consideration much more than my own, or really anyone's who >> hasn't participated in the publishing process. Having strong opinions >> about open access in general (which I do... I'll support open access >> strongly till the end) is not the same as having opinions about the >> nature of the journals themselves: > > Adi -- thanks for providing the full context! It really helps. > > One little nitpick: I think there's a weird branding thing, where us Free > Culture people we like the Public Library of Science, the organization. > And then the journals are all branded PLoS, no matter their reputation > level, and so we're stuck in a weird position. > > It'd be nice if we stopped referring to the journals as "PLoS Biology" and > "PLoS One" but instead had some name each one. > > That way, we can point to shining examples, and when critics point out > (rightfully) that quality is varied, people won't mistakenly spread that > black mark to other journals carrying the same brand. > > -- Asheesh. > > -- > Keep emotionally active. Cater to your favorite > neurosis._______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss > _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
