• Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Isn’t it a bit ridiculous for researchers to have to pay a publisher to publish the content that they themselves make money from?

    They’re double dipping, and also triple dipping with the peer reviews done on a volunteer basis.

    A racket, I say.

    • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Quadruple dipping because they publish both open access journals that authors pay extra for, plus the standard subscription journals where universities need to pay for access too. Subscription obviously never got cheaper, no matter if the amount of open access journals increased (didn’t check that though, but fits well into the scheme)

  • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Chiming in with barely any knowledge on the topic.

    Universities are massive institutions, with serious cash behind them. What the hell is stopping, say, all the public Australian universities just setting up their own journal, running it at cost for all the universities in Australia?

    Make it make sense.

  • underwire212@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Have a cup of coffee every morning? Maybe switch to every other day to offset the costs!”

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Obviously scientists don’t want to work any more and eat avocado toast too much.

    Have they tried getting a college degree to increase their job prospects?