From: Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 10:01:45 +0100

Things may have changed in the last decade, of course. According to
my, now dated, personal experience, in my time at Elsevier, Academic
Press and Springer, "n" was close to 100% of the journal contracts.

Jan Velterop

On 09/01/2019 06:06, LIBLICENSE wrote:
From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 02:15:09 +0000

I'd love to know the data re "income, particularly when it is "per
accepted paper" or "by published volume", as it often enough is..."

My personal experience of this is a very small "n" from which I'd
never generalize to what is "often."

Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe
[log in to unmask]

________________________________
From: Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:53:14 +0100

"Larger journals (measured by income) pay more."

This is generally true. It is also not unlikely to be a factor in
Editors' acceptance/rejection policies. Selectivity and prestige are
important, but income, particularly when it is "per accepted paper" or
"by published volume", as it often enough is, is likely to be too,
especially if the payment is substantial. The idea that only
APC-funded open access journals might possibly suffer from this
phenomenon is a myth.

Jan Velterop

On 07/01/2019 23:37, LIBLICENSE wrote:
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