From: adam hodgkin <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 19:04:18 +0200

It is a bit confusing when the 2 Anderson's (Rick and Kent) produce blogs
in quick succession.

But Kent Anderson's recent piece  at Scholarly Kitchen is relevant to the
Aries acquisition -- though he wrote it before the coup.

https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/07/30/dropping-hammer-predatory-
publishers-get-pounded-regulators-press/

One way of interpreting the Aries acquisition is not so much an attempt to
control and hold on to the scientific paper workflow (though I think it is
that), but as a straightforward reinforcement and investment in peer review
and quality control as such -- for the total system. And in this way it may
be a more strategic asset than Wiley's acquisition of Atypon.

The inevitable (but mostly unforeseen and uncalled for) rise of Predatory
Publishing (and as Kent Anderson points out) with big attractions for
'neglected' areas of scientific research in an Open Access market (striking
problems also for publishing in India and China) does also attract
substandard and fraudulent papers and research. Some models of OA
publishing may be able to afford heavyweight editorial systems and it would
be very much in Elsevier's interest to sustain this without owning it --
but quality and complexity in workflow has its costs and maintaining these
standards with a cost structure forms a type of defensive moat. And
incidentally leaves the 'free' systems as more exposed to the predations of
predatory publishers -- by definition those publishers will not be looking
for Aries or similar with those cost/benefits of managing and revising,
improving and rejecting.

Is this a moment in Elsevier's effort to evolve to an iOS position for
scientific research, leaving classic OA efforts to trail in an Android
mode, perpetually open but somewhat vulnerable?

adam

Adam Hodgkin

www.exacteditions.com
and my book *Following Searle on Twitter*
http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/F/bo25370730.html


On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 2:35 AM LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>>
> Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 20:24:01 -0400
>
> For an excellent analysis by Kent Anderson.  See:
>
> Interpreting Elsevier’s Acquisition of Aries Systems
>
> https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/08/06/interpreting-elseviers-
> acquisition-aries-systems/
>
> Excerpt:
>
> "Even if Elsevier doesn’t grow significantly in revenues with this
> acquisition, it grows significantly in gravitational pull and
> centrality. Thousands of papers flow through Editorial Manager every
> day. The only other comparably positioned manuscript system is
> ScholarOne, owned by Clarivate. There seems to be an arms race between
> Clarivate and Elsevier when it comes to data and centrality. This move
> puts Elsevier on a better footing for the market confrontations that
> may lie ahead."
>