The latest open-access objection
So the latest line against open-access publishing (specifically, the author-pays model, and do I really need to pull a Peter Suber on you guys?) goes something like “The fees they’re charging can’t possibly cover costs!”
Which is a far better objection than what they’ve been slinging around. If, mind you, it’s true.
Where have the objectors been looking for data? From for-profit publishers. Another Peter Suber moment—do I need to say this is a stupid source? And for similar reasons, one doesn’t necessarily want to ask the new open-access efforts. Not only are they potentially biased, they’ve not been around long enough to know what stuff costs.
Who knows? Who knows and has no ax to grind? Oh, for Pete’s sake, people, think. The service bureaus. THE SERVICE BUREAUS. Or, alternately, non-profit society publishers, though there I’d want to get a range of responses because I’m not sure all of them are efficiently run.
Honestly. No need for stabs in the dark here. The data are out there.