Print

Print


FW: On the opposition to open access Hi all,

Re. below, as this message outlines, it would be advisable for all Librarians to keep their eye on the ball when it comes to the discourse on public access.

Have a great weekend,
Leo

------ Forwarded Message

Subject: On the opposition to open access

** with apologies for cross-posting  **

An article in Nature on Wednesday, January 24, by Jim Giles, PR's  
"pit bull" takes on open access, reveals that the American  
Association of Publishers hired the "pit bull of public relations",  
Eric Dezenhall, as a consultant on strategies to oppose the open  
access movement.

According to Nature, "The consultant advised them to focus on simple  
messages, such as "Public access equals government censorship". He  
hinted that the publishers should attempt to equate traditional  
publishing models with peer review...."

When assessing arguments against open access, it is important to  
consider where the messages are coming from.  Dezenhall's previous  
clients include the former Enron chief and, according to Business  
Week, Exxonmobile (to criticize the environmental group Greenpeace).

Equating public access with government censorship is absurd.  There  
are many open access publishers (including CACUL, with their  
Occasional Papers Series, and Evidence Based Librarianship, which  
members of CLA's own EBL Interest Group are very much involved in)  
who perform peer review.  The Directory of Open Access Journals  
currently lists over 2,500 fully open access, peer-reviewed journals,  
and the numbers are growing rapidly.

In addition to fully open access journals, there are many journals  
which allow authors to retain copyright so that they can self-archive  
their works for open access, and also many which have hybrid open  
access models.

For those who do not have access to Nature, there is an excerpt on  
Open Access News, at:
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/
2007_01_21_fosblogarchive.html#116966479599813483

Open Access News also details follow-up articles (in the Chronicle of  
Higher Education and Washington Post), as well as comments from  
bloggers.

My own comment, Stop fighting the inevitable - and free funds for OA!
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2007/01/stop-fighting-inevitable-
and-free.html
focuses on the substantial funds spent by publishers to lobby against  
open access ($300,000 - $500,000 for this one consultation alone;  
Elsevier's lobbying budget in the U.S. alone is in the millions  
annually).

Heather Morrison
Convenor, CLA Task Force on Open Access
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]">http:[log in to unmask]


------ End of Forwarded Message