I am delighted to see the UC take on Nature. Hopefully this should
lead to a larger awareness that for-profit academic journals have no
reason to exist. None.

See below blog and links therein
http://scienceblogs.com/bookoftrogool/2010/06/gauntlet_volleying.php
--------------------------------snip
Several of my Twitter contacts noted what they thought to be a slap at
librarian research and assessment skills toward the end of NPG's
statement. I can believe that reading, but I incline toward a far more
cynical subtext that is actually an insult to faculty, something like
"We have to get those librarians out of the way; they know too much.
Let's try getting faculty to evaluate these deals—after all, we've
been hoodwinking them for thirty years!" Pick your poison; there's no
way to tell who's got the right reading. Or perhaps they're both
right.

Now then, this business of "discounts." It's—how to put this
politely—hooey, and so is NPG's apparent opinion of the
competitiveness of academic librarians over who's paying what to whom.

Ignore list prices for journal packages. Nobody pays list. Seriously,
nobody, at least nobody in UCal's league. Your library pays the best
price it can manage to negotiate. Those prices vary wildly from
institution to institution and vendor to vendor, "discounts" or no
"discounts." We librarians know this; it's an inevitable concomitant
of the secrecy we are forced to by these very same vendors. You saw
NPG whinging about that, didn't you? You surely did. This is why. It's
hard for us to negotiate a decent deal when black clouds of near-total
secrecy keep us from knowing what a decent deal even is. NPG knows
that. Of course they do.

So if NPG expected librarians to get all angry at California for
negotiating a good deal last time around—sorry, no, that's not how we
think. We think "Nice going, California! I'll try to do better next
time renewal negotiations begin; otherwise, NPG will stretch me on the
rack just as they're trying to do to California now." California
didn't get a "discount" in the last cycle out of the goodness of NPG's
heart—they drove a hard bargain. Good on ’em for doing their job well,
responsibly managing taxpayer funds. Moreover, that NPG doesn't like
that last deal is hardly sufficient reason for California to knuckle
meekly under and accept whatever NPG is asking for this time.

One more observation: what I'm seeing right now is that NPG has no
friends standing beside it. That may change; the AAP and ALPSP and the
other usual suspects haven't weighed in yet. I expect they're
wondering what to do. If the California labor-boycott threat is
serious, and California's current pugnacious stance suggests that it
is, the last thing other publishers want to do is land in the doghouse
alongside NPG. Libraries discontinuing subscriptions is serious, but a
large faculty labor boycott is crippling.




-raghu.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to