LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 7 Jan 2019 17:37:11 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (83 lines)
From: JJE Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 11:35:34 -0500

I have yet to encounter an STM publisher that did not pay the editors
of its journals. In HSS the situation is not uniform. Larger journals
(measured by income) pay more.

Joe Esposito


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 8:46 PM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: "Jean-Claude Guédon" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 16:51:24 -0500
>
> The issue of editor compensations (or whatever they may be called) has
> long been a point of high interest that still remains obscure. It is
> of high interest because it lies exactly at the intersection of the
> financial and the intellectual dimensions of scientific publishing. it
> is part of the "entanglement" issue raised by Aileen Fyfe and her
> colleagues (https://zenodo.org/record/546100#.WhSeiWMW38t).
>
> In an example I heard years ago, the compensation was so much per
> peer-reviewed article.  Information is much needed on this point.
> Opacity does not agree easily with appeals to market rules.
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon
>
>
> Le dimanche 06 janvier 2019 à 16:25 -0500, LIBLICENSE a écrit :
> From: leo waaijers <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 22:09:28 +0100
>
> Dear Anthony,
>
> No, I have no special evidence. I simply referred to an article I
> thought might be interesting to the list. And yes, I know the
> journalist well enough (1) to believe him when he says that he has his
> information ‘on good authority’, and (2) to know that he will not
> share his source with me.
>
> In the meantime, your information about editors receiving substantial
> payments triggered a question. Where would the loyalty of these
> editors go in the sometimes heated debate between research funders and
> publishers about OA or Plan S?
>
> Leo
>
>
> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 09:36:35 +0000
>
> I have no idea where the information about Elsevier policies have come
> from but there is one assertion in this curious report that is so
> incorrect that I want to counter it. I have run journals for parts or
> all of the lists of four major companies over forty years. I have
> never published a journal the editor of which received no payment.
> Sometimes in the medical world the amounts were substantial.
>
> I know what I am talking about. I wrote the contracts. Sometimes but
> rarely the payment (at the editor’s request) was described as expenses
> - drawn upon for air fares - but usually they were clearly
> differentiated from expenses incurred in editing the journal and quite
> often the costs of a journal office (the editor’s assistant etc) were
> also likewise subject to a separate clause.
>
> Now I have never worked for Elsevier. Maybe Leo has special evidence.
> Please disclose this.
>
> Anthony
> ________________________________
>
> From: leo waaijers <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2019 19:11:00 +0100
>
> For those who think that Elsevier, positioning itself as an
> information analytics company, might be less interested in individual
> journals the following article might be revealing.
>
> https://www.scienceguide.nl/2018/12/elsevier-willing-to-compensate-editors-to-prevent-them-from-flipping/
>
> Leo Waaijers

ATOM RSS1 RSS2