<div>On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Wagner, A. Ben <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:abwagner@buffalo.edu" target="_blank">abwagner@buffalo.edu</a>></span> wrote:</div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I have not followed the Emerald issue since it is not a publisher I deal with as a librarian or a scholar, so I will not comment directly on that issue. However, at least from a U.S. perspective and speaking much more generally, I'm not sure complaints from U.S. academics about businesses being business-focused will carry much weight. From where I sit, academia is getting more and more like big business every day with enterprise/start up zones, ROI on research, running leaner and meaner, pursue of grants and industry partnerships while teaching sometimes suffer (though that is always denied), looking for every opportunity to license/commercialize research, and I could go on. This isn't necessarily all bad. Just pointing out that academia, again at least in the U.S., is a business as much as any corporation, imho. So I ask the question. In academia, is business trumping scholarship? So which is the pot and which is the kettle?<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, publishing is a business.</div><div><br></div><div>Yes, universities are (alas) becoming more and more like businesses.</div><div><br></div><div>But research is research.</div><div><br>
</div><div>And researchers are researchers.</div><div><br></div><div>And research is funded by tax-payers.</div><div><br></div><div>And the uptake, usage, applications, productivity and progress of scientific and scholarly research are obstructed by access barriers.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So let's not obscure the real contingencies by saying "it's all just business."</div><div><br></div><div>What's not evident to me is why Emerald is addressing its attempt at self-justification to libraries, when it is their authors' research that is at issue:</div>
<div><br></div><div>Libraries are the clients for Emerald's product.</div><div><br></div><div>But authors are Emerald's suppliers. And they supply free of charge. And so do the peers who do the peer review for Emerald journals. </div>
<div><br></div><div>So please, Emerald, address researchers and tax-payers, not your business clientele: Librarians have absolutely nothing to do with Emerald policy on author self-archiving.</div><div><br></div><div> Stevan Harnad</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Views expressed herein are my personal reviews and not reflective of my institution, administration, management, or faculties.<br>
<br>
--A. Ben Wagner, Sciences Librarian<br>
University at Buffalo<br>
<a href="mailto:abwagner@buffalo.edu">abwagner@buffalo.edu</a><br>
<br><br></blockquote></div></div>