From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 10:16:36 +0100

Hi David

I accept almost everything you say. What I was writing was partly tongue in
cheek - especially about the ACS.

Yes indeed we both worked at different times for the same major university
press and one could say more but I am not going to except to point out that
the main role of the university vis-à-vis that university press might be
seen as extracting as much money as possible from it.

The current UK government does not represent my beliefs  but I do have a
vote and I can and do campaign to change it.

So can members of learned societies. They can campaign for change in the
publishing policy of their publishing arm. Sometimes they do. They are
representative of the community that belongs to them and these members are
almost certainly the majority of researchers in that discipline and that
country

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: David Prosser <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:15:32 +0000

Hi Anthony

Two points, one specific, one general.  First the specific, you might want
to speak to librarian friends of yours about the American Chemical
Society’s publishing activity and gauge how they react to the suggestion
that the ACS is, practically if not formally, part of a “small group of
commercial actors”.

More generally, I wonder how genuinely representative university presses
and society publishers are of the communities that they serve.
Often there is formal representation: a Publishing Committee, Delegates or
Syndics, etc.who guide general policy.  But I suspect (having worked, like
Anthony has, for a major university press and with society publishers) that
a lot of the day-to-day, but nevertheless important, decisions do not have
much membership input.
For example, I wonder how widely the APA consulted with its membership
before issuing take-down notices for ‘unauthorised online postings of APA
journal articles':

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/unauthorized-internet-posting.aspx

And I can’t imagine that a major chemistry society based in the UK
consulted widely with its membership before attempting to impose massive
price rises on customers.  Are these publishers really ‘representative
bodies’?

David