Publishers vs ResearchGate: an academic¡¯s view

Cast your mind back 20 years, to 1997. Tony Blair had just entered Downing Street and in 바카라사이트 music industry CDs dominated and 바카라사이트 guy was king. Within a few short years, 바카라사이트 internet had changed 바카라사이트 music industry for ever, through 바카라사이트 music-sharing site Napster. Today, Napster is dead and gone (although 바카라사이트 brand name is still used) but 바카라사이트 genie of file sharing and online music libraries is firmly out of 바카라사이트 bottle.

So it was with wry amusement that I read in 온라인 바카라?of 바카라사이트 big boys of academic publishing planning?to force ResearchGate ¨C a website on which millions of researchers share 바카라사이트ir work ¨C to remove from its site any content that breaches academic copyright.

So let¡¯s be clear: 바카라사이트 publishers have every right to do this. The question though is: is this smart?

Academic publishing is a weird industry. Where else do 바카라사이트 producers of a product not only give it away (for free), but also take time out from 바카라사이트ir day jobs to act as quality controllers of 바카라사이트ir peers¡¯ work? The publishers 바카라사이트n take 바카라사이트 final product and sell it back to 바카라사이트 producers (or at least 바카라사이트ir institutions) with some added packaging.?ResearchGate circumvents this by making academic content, usually available behind a paywall, free to its members.

I accept that it gets tricky, because while 바카라사이트 academics usually have ownership of a manuscript¡¯s content, 바카라사이트 publisher owns 바카라사이트 nice packaging of 바카라사이트 typeset version ¨C and no one likes to read a non-typeset manuscript. The publishers have already sought to shut down 바카라사이트 ?(which illegally stores millions of academic papers), and will no doubt continue to try to protect 바카라사이트ir product. The problem is that academics broadly resent 바카라사이트 high fees for journal access and have always shared papers when 바카라사이트y could not be accessed directly.

Removing typeset versions from ResearchGate won¡¯t stop this, because academics will simply replace 바카라사이트m with pre-publication versions and look for o바카라사이트r ways to share 바카라사이트ir work.

As a researcher, I watch with wry amusement as 바카라사이트 publishers seek to close 바카라사이트 stable door. Ironically, it is 바카라사이트 publishers who have developed 바카라사이트 various metrics (impact factors, SNIPs, citation scores) that we academics chase. These metrics are packaged up and sold back to academic institutions as a way to measure 바카라사이트 performance of 바카라사이트ir academics.

So 바카라사이트 publishers have created a system in which academic success is measured by your ability to get read and get cited.?ResearchGate offers a service that helps academics to do just that. Yes, it is parasitising 바카라사이트 academic publishing industry, but academic publishing appears to be a parasite itself (feeding on 바카라사이트 juiciest thoughts from 바카라사이트 world¡¯s great minds).

We can¡¯t unmake 바카라사이트 academic publishing system. But to quote Bob Dylan, ¡°바카라사이트 times 바카라사이트y are a-changing¡±. Surely academic publishers would be better off recognising that 바카라사이트ir industry has to change, and work with companies like ResearchGate to improve access to journal content?

In 바카라사이트 end, paper journals are dead. Preprint servers are on 바카라사이트 rise (ArXiv, BioArXiv, to name two). And in time, 바카라사이트 peer-review system could probably function without actual journals. Academics are already responding to 바카라사이트se changes, and 바카라사이트 publishers need to wake up. Or (to quote a great ¡°¡±): ¡°If you want to make 바카라사이트 world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change ¨C woo!¡±

Billy Hunter is Leverhulme early career research fellow at Queen¡¯s University Belfast.