From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:21:31 +0100

I am not suggesting the term "predatory" publisher should be retained but
you can see why it was cleverly taken up or invented by Jeffrey. If you are
a researcher you still get just as many mailings urging you to contribute,
serve on editorial boards etc and the self- descriptions of the publishing
companies asking you are becoming more and more convincing.
Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 04:15:12 +0000

>Interesting, here is an attempt to eliminate a useful and quite precise
>terminology - "a predatory publisher." Why - just to get extra points
>in kowtowing to the same powerful forces which silenced Jeffrey Beall?

Ari, if you think I’m kowtowing to anyone on this issue you clearly don’t
know me well. But if you’d like to know why I think the term “predatory” is
not, in fact, either very useful or very precise you can read my
explanation here:

https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/05/11/should-
we-retire-the-term-predatory-publishing/

---
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dean for Collections & Scholarly Communication Marriott Library,
University of Utah
Desk: (801) 587-9989
Cell: (801) 721-1687
[log in to unmask]