I watched Professor Martin Weller, "The Battle for Open," and found it quite interesting and illuminating! I realize that although Open Resources are growing significantly the battle is still waging.
He explains that even though something might be an Open resource, it does not really mean it is free and there is an agenda by many to keep it that way. Many creators and authors pay publishers to publish as an Open resource and there is fear that this may in fact actually end up increasing the cost of articles and texts. If an author pays the publisher more money than another author, they may get more exposure which often means more success. There are even publishers who charge the authors to publish and then charge libraries for access.
There is a more green route where developers and authors self-publish instead of paying publishers to do so AND the down side is, if developers and authors are not getting out there significantly, it can impact their presence and future income. Part of the answer is for academics to develop a stronger digital presence to support their self-publishing. However, this too takes time and expertise.
I was not especially surprised, but disappointed to find out about "predatory open access journals" that charge to publish without any peer review, which of course may impact quality of academic articles out on the internet, especially for uninformed people that are not aware of how those journals operate. (See Maclean's Magazine article, http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/does-peer-review-do-more-harm-than-good/) This is a timely article by Luc Rinaldi highlighting some of the current issues around peer review.
In a way, I was a bit relieved to find what appears to me to be very little altruism in the area of Open Resources. If we can develop efficient ways for creators and authors to support themselves well AND have their resources be open, it paves the way for higher quality and more accessibility for all.
On a lighter note, I was watching the video outside and suddenly realized I wasn't the only one watching it. Professor Martin had gained a larger audience. I have included a picture of the interested party below.
He explains that even though something might be an Open resource, it does not really mean it is free and there is an agenda by many to keep it that way. Many creators and authors pay publishers to publish as an Open resource and there is fear that this may in fact actually end up increasing the cost of articles and texts. If an author pays the publisher more money than another author, they may get more exposure which often means more success. There are even publishers who charge the authors to publish and then charge libraries for access.
There is a more green route where developers and authors self-publish instead of paying publishers to do so AND the down side is, if developers and authors are not getting out there significantly, it can impact their presence and future income. Part of the answer is for academics to develop a stronger digital presence to support their self-publishing. However, this too takes time and expertise.
I was not especially surprised, but disappointed to find out about "predatory open access journals" that charge to publish without any peer review, which of course may impact quality of academic articles out on the internet, especially for uninformed people that are not aware of how those journals operate. (See Maclean's Magazine article, http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/does-peer-review-do-more-harm-than-good/) This is a timely article by Luc Rinaldi highlighting some of the current issues around peer review.
In a way, I was a bit relieved to find what appears to me to be very little altruism in the area of Open Resources. If we can develop efficient ways for creators and authors to support themselves well AND have their resources be open, it paves the way for higher quality and more accessibility for all.
On a lighter note, I was watching the video outside and suddenly realized I wasn't the only one watching it. Professor Martin had gained a larger audience. I have included a picture of the interested party below.