Mass Editor Resignation Highlights Broken Academic Publishing (Full Transcript)

Editors quit an open-access journal, criticizing high fees and profit-driven models, and hint at a new initiative to reshape scholarly publishing.

Download Transcript (DOCX)

Speakers

Add new speaker

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Academic publishing is broken, but the revolution is about to begin. Check this out. Mass resignation from the editors of Critical Public Health, an open access journal with Taylor & Francis, and they forced the publishers to publish their goodbye. In this goodbye, they complain, this system's financially unsustainable. It's academically unsustainable, and I see it. Researchers come to me and say, hey, I got my article, I gotta pay $3,000 to publish it. What? All models to make changes have failed to break the problem of profit maximization. Publishing is one of the most profitable industries in the world with margins of 40%. But these editors have a new project in mind, nothing short of a revolution. Watch this space, and I've got a longer video showing you tips and tricks to avoid the exorbitant cost of publishing and still break ground in your field.

Summary

A speaker argues that academic publishing is fundamentally broken and ripe for change, citing a mass resignation of editors from the open-access journal Critical Public Health (Taylor & Francis). The departing editors claim the current publishing system is financially and academically unsustainable, with researchers facing steep article processing charges (e.g., $3,000) while publishers maintain extremely high profit margins (around 40%). The speaker suggests existing reform models have failed because they don’t overcome profit maximization, and teases a forthcoming “revolutionary” new project by the editors along with advice on avoiding high publishing costs.

Copy

Download

Title

Editors Resign, Citing Unsustainable Academic Publishing Costs

Copy

Download

Keywords

academic publishing Remove

Remove

open access Remove

Remove

Taylor & Francis Remove

Remove

Critical Public Health Remove

Remove

mass resignation Remove

Remove

editors

Remove

article processing charges Remove

Remove

APCs

Remove

profit margins Remove

Remove

publisher profits Remove

Remove

financial sustainability Remove

Remove

research dissemination Remove

Remove

reform models Remove

Remove

profit maximization Remove

Remove

Copy

Download

Key Takeaways

Editors of an open-access journal resigned en masse, publicly criticizing the current publishing system.
High article processing charges (e.g., $3,000) create barriers for researchers and strain sustainability.
Major publishers can sustain very high margins, fueling perceptions of profiteering.
Reform attempts have struggled to change incentives tied to profit maximization.
A new alternative publishing initiative may emerge from the departing editors, signaling potential change.

Copy

Download

Sentiments

Negative: The tone is critical and frustrated about exploitative costs and profit-driven publishing, though it also carries a hopeful note about an impending reform or 'revolution'.

Copy

Download

Enter your query

{{ secondsToHumanTime(time) }}

Back

Forward

{{ Math.round(speed * 100) / 100 }}x

{{ secondsToHumanTime(duration) }}

Select Audio file