Amy,
When we talk of OA, we mean "open" simply in terms of money ... nothing
else. Now how can it be OA if he restriction in terms of money is simply
shunted from users to authors? Its simply reverse restricted access
(RRA) not OA at all. So just as conventional journals restrict access to
non-prosperous readers, OA journals restrict access to non-prosperous
researchers. Both access models claim that they have pathways for "poor"
authors or "poor" readers but we know they do not work.
The much more dangerous aspect of OA is there is now a mechanism to
foster confirmatory bias since opinions backed by money (that differ
from the mainstream) will have a greater potential to see the light of
day as publishers are no longer making money from readers
Suhail
On 3/23/2012 11:45 AM, Amy Price wrote:
> Suhail,
>
> Are you saying that OA is not what it seems because the researchers will
> end up eating the costs so it is not OA at all because it reduces
> accessibility to all but quite prosperous researchers? Are you opposed for
> other reasons as well?
>
> Amy
|