Update. Here's another article that made it through peer review (at #WoltersKluwer) falsely asserting that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004612
(#paywalled)

General thesis: Paying APCs is a hardship (true) and the prices are going up (true). Therefore, to help medical students publish OA, medical schools should fund their APCs.

The article never mentions no-fee OA journals (#DiamondOA) or no-fee OA repositories (#GreenOA).

#ScholComm

Update. Here's another article that made it through peer review (at #WoltersKluwer) falsely asserting that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004612
(#paywalled)

General thesis: Paying APCs is a hardship (true) and the prices are going up (true). Therefore, to help medical students publish OA, medical schools should fund their APCs.

The article never mentions no-fee OA journals (#DiamondOA) or no-fee OA repositories (#GreenOA).

#ScholComm

1/ I'm sympathetic to #NIH-funded authors who want to publish in certain #APC-based #OpenAccess journals and can't find the money to pay the APCs. But it's false to say that they must publish in those journals, in any other APC-based OA journals, or even in OA journals. Shame on _Inside Higher Ed_ for leaving this false impression..
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/research/2025/12/05/nih-policy-holding-researchers-hostage

PS: I repeat: Compliance with the NIH OA policy is free of charge. Moreover, compliance is all about depositing in a certain repository, not publishing in a certain journal or kind of journal. The NIH has a #GreenOA policy, not a #GoldOA policy. The same is true for all the other federal agencies with OA policies, not just the NIH. When a journal charges NIH-funded authors an APC to publish, the fee is to publish in that particular journal, not to comply with the NIH policy. Don't be fooled by the widespread misunderstanding that compliance with these policies requires paying any kind of fee. Don't be fooled by journals and publishers that cynically spread this myth themselves or leave it uncorrected. You can help by correcting this falsehood wherever you see it. You can also help by working with hiring, promotion, tenure, and funding committees to care more about the quality of research than the journals in which it is published.

🧵

#APCs #NelsonMemo #NIH #OpenAccess #OAintheUSA #PublicAccess #Repositories

"For Researchers in the Humanities, Is Open Really Fair?"
https://katinamagazine.org/content/article/open-knowledge/2025/for-researchers-in-the-humanities-is-open-really-fair

PS: This article objects to #APCs and "transformative" (#ReadAndPublish) agreements, especially in the humanities. So far, so good. But then it leaves the false impression that all or most #OpenAccess falls into those two categories, which is false and harmful. It never mentions #GreenOA. It mentions #DiamondOA once, for books, and never for articles. It's strong on problems and very weak and even misleading on solutions.

I share the objections to APCs and read-and-publish agreements. I wrote stronger versions of them, extended to all disciplines, for the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/

I'm in the humanities and (with the exception of one 1999 book) have made all my books and articles OA. I've never paid an APC and never will. I boycott APC-based publishers both as an author and referee and encourage others to do so.

Scholars in the humanities need accurate info about their OA options, not one-sided criticism of OA as such.

#BOAI20 #Humanities

Update. #SocArXiv (@socarxiv) is dealing with a similar problem by requiring submitters to have #ORCIDs and tightening its focus on the social sciences.
https://socopen.org/2025/11/19/socarxiv-submission-rule-changes/

#GreenOA #Preprints #Repositories

I applaud the new #StockholmDeclaration for the reform of academic publishing.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.251805

It calls for action on four high-level principles, and makes 34 specific recommendations under those four heads. Here are the four:

"(i) Academia should resume control of publishing using non-profit publishing models (e.g. diamond open-access). (ii) Adjust incentive systems to merit quality, not quantity, in a reputation economy where the gaming of publication numbers and citation metrics distorts the perception of academic excellence. (iii) Implement mechanisms to prevent and detect fake publications and fraud which are independent of publishers. (iv) Draft and implement legislations, regulations and policies to increase publishing quality and integrity."

I just signed it and hope you will too. When you sign, you can weigh in separately on each of the 34 specific recommendations.
https://sciii-it.org/stockholm-declaration/

#AI #Assessment #DiamondOA #GreenOA #Integrity #Nonprofit #OpenAccess #OpenInfrastructure #OpenSource #Publishing #Repositories #RightsRetention #ScholComm

I applaud the new #StockholmDeclaration for the reform of academic publishing.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.251805

It calls for action on four high-level principles, and makes 34 specific recommendations under those four heads. Here are the four:

"(i) Academia should resume control of publishing using non-profit publishing models (e.g. diamond open-access). (ii) Adjust incentive systems to merit quality, not quantity, in a reputation economy where the gaming of publication numbers and citation metrics distorts the perception of academic excellence. (iii) Implement mechanisms to prevent and detect fake publications and fraud which are independent of publishers. (iv) Draft and implement legislations, regulations and policies to increase publishing quality and integrity."

I just signed it and hope you will too. When you sign, you can weigh in separately on each of the 34 specific recommendations.
https://sciii-it.org/stockholm-declaration/

#AI #Assessment #DiamondOA #GreenOA #Integrity #Nonprofit #OpenAccess #OpenInfrastructure #OpenSource #Publishing #Repositories #RightsRetention #ScholComm

Update. Bad news from the #NEH for #KnowledgeCommons (and the rest of us).
https://about.hcommons.org/2025/04/17/on-the-neh-and-our-path-forward/

"On April 2, 2025, we received notification that our NEH Infrastructure and Capacity Building Challenge Grant, awarded in 2020, was terminated effective immediately…On April 10, 2025, we received further…notification that our contract to provide the NEH’s Designated Public-Access #Repository was also being terminated…This loss is devastating…both for the financial impact it represents…but also for the unceremonious end to a goal we’d set for ourselves years ago…Not to mention the bigger picture here: that designated public-access repository is no longer needed, because it is assumed that the NEH will no longer be funding research, and thus there will be no results of research to make publicly accessible."

PS: All the agencies covered by the #OSTP #NelsonMemo must designate #OpenAccess repositories for their OA content. NEH was the only agency to designate a repo not hosted by the govt. All the other agency repos will be hosted by the govt, where they will be subject to political censorship or takedowns.

#Censorship #DefendResearch #GreenOA #Takedowns #Trump #USPol #USPolitics

Update. Here's another piece that made it through peer review (at Oxford UP) falsely assuming that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezaf092

The author concludes that there is *not* too much OA, but only because APC discounts and waivers exist. Imagine how much she could have strengthened her argument by bringing in #DiamondOA and #GreenOA.

#ScholComm