I appreciate the irony in my university inviting me to a workshop on Ethics in Scientific Publishing, hosted by Elsevier.
Recent searches
Search options
#elsevier
2 posts2 participants0 posts today
Replied in thread
Du hast die #Linguistik vergessen. Die sind fast ok. Wir haben Teile, die wie Mathe ohnehin selbst LaTeX machen, weshalb das einfacher ist als in den restlichen Geisteswissenschaften.
Wir haben einen großen Verlag, der Diamond OpenAccess ist (weder Leser*innen noch Autor*innen zahlen) und wir haben die ganzen Journals von den Societies, die OA anbieten oder OA sind.
Zum Beispiel die Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft von der #DGfS ist auch DiamondOA, @glossa gibt es international. Die haben sich vom #Elsevier-Zeitschrift #Lingua neu gegründet.
Ihr müsst nur die Herausgeber-Boards dazu bringen, die Zeitschriften neu zu gründen. Scholar-owned. Die Marken müssen bei uns bleiben. Verstehe auch nicht, wieso Mathematiker*innen sich für diese Boards hergeben. Die #Mathematik war ja Vorreiter.
„Ganz am Ende (manchmal Jahre später) hat man dann seinen Verlagsbienchenstempel "Dein Paper wurde bei Famous Journal akzeptiert" und dann posten die das nochmal nur mit hässlicherem Typesetting, neu eingebauten Tippfehlern und ganz und gar nicht accessible unter einer URL die sich jederzeit ändern kann. Von Permalinks hat da noch nie jemand was gehört, da muss dann die DOI her.“
Du, die haben Jahrhunderte Erfahrung!
Aber genau so ist es. Was da für Zeit verplämpert wird für Proofreading usw. Die schicken das nach Indien, wo alle Symbole kaputt gemacht werden. Die Menschen vom Handbuch #Semantik können Lieder davon singen. Das sind enorme Kosten, die wir tragen (bzw. die Steuerzahler*innen), damit die Verlage sich das einstecken können.
If you're using a #QT #Webengine based browser like me (@qutebrowser or #Falkon), #Elsevier 's #ScienceDirect website may cause issues because they "only support the last 3 releases" of most browsers. Luckily, they use the user agent to detect the browser. So, a workaround is to use something like this, with a new enough version for the #Chrome version:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) QtWebEngine/6.8.2 Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Another reason to hate #Elsevier (the blame is also on the specific journals/editorial boards that allow this, as it does not seem to be generalized across journals): generative AI summaries through fictive* questions and answers.
And this is added just below the abstract, so you cannot miss it...
* i.e. generated by LLMs based on the content of the article
![Screenshot:
Questions answered in this article
This is generative AI content and the quality may vary. Learn more [link].
Beta
Powered by AI](https://cdn.masto.host/sciencessocial/media_attachments/files/114/149/280/007/508/634/original/80d26fd35cc9d26c.png "Screenshot:
Questions answered in this article
This is generative AI content and the quality may vary. Learn more [link].
Beta
Powered by AI")
"Between 2019/20 and 2022/23, the University [of Cambridge] paid £12.6M to seven major commercial #publishers: #Elsevier, #Wiley, Taylor & Francis, #Springer, #Sage, Oxford University Press (#OUP), and Cambridge University Press (#CUP). This was the highest expenditure among 21 UK #universities that provided data."
Varsity OnlineCambridge spends over £12M on academic journal accessCambridge has spent more than any other UK university on academic journal subscriptions
We've got a new annual report by RELX (the company running #Elsevier). https://www.relx.com/media/press-releases/year-2025/annual-report-2024
The profit margins continue to be absurd. It just escapes me how we can be fine as researchers with throwing public money at these companies.
www.relx.comPublication of 2024 Annual Report and Annual Report on Form 20-F#Title,Content#
The use of AI to create bogus scientific papers is becoming an increasingly serious problem, researchers say, threatening life-saving medical research as well as the integrity of academic publishing.
www.computing.co.ukAI-enabled fakery has ‘infiltrated academic publishing’ say researchersThe use of AI to create bogus scientific papers is becoming an increasingly serious problem, researchers say, threatening life-saving medical research as well as the ...
Just refused another review request for #Elsevier. The company is actively collaborating with the fossil fuel industry. This is something we cannot tolerate any longer.
https://stopelsevier.wordpress.com/
#StopElsevier#StopElsevierTurn the page on science in service of extraction
Seher Taak 
If neither fascism or climate change is going to kill us all, it will be "AI".
People are plagiarizing ai-hallucinated "scientific papers" and Elsevier defends it even after they have been caught.
Look at this utter nonsense.
#ai #hallucinations #nonsense #plagiarism #elsevier #science
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/02/10/vegetative-electron-microscopy-fingerprint-paper-mill/
I’ve used Mendeley since I was an undergrad, but the bugs have worn me down and I want to switch. I think Zotero looks to be the best place to go next?
Now I just need to overcome the rage (and effort barrier) that I can’t transfer the library structure from Mendeley in one go, thanks for that Elsevier…
Three British universities (including the University of Sheffield ) have decided not to continue their #Elsevier read-and-publish deals! #OpenAccess
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20250211161002365
University World NewsAcademic publishing could be facing a watershed momentThe end of some universities’ transitional open access agreements with the publisher Elsevier, due to take effect at the end of 2025, may be a water...
Peter Barr explains why three UK #universities recently cancelled their #Elsevier #ReadAndPublish agreements and why these deals are unsustainable.
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20250211161002365
PS: My own objections to these deals overlap significantly with Barr's. See the #BOAI20 Recommendation 4 ("Move away from read-and-publish agreements").
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/
University World NewsAcademic publishing could be facing a watershed momentThe end of some universities’ transitional open access agreements with the publisher Elsevier, due to take effect at the end of 2025, may be a water...
#Elsevier isn't just about predatory publishing and negotiating tactics, but also debasing themselves to defend vacuous AI/plagiarism errors like "vegetative electron microscopy". Scientists should view publishing with them as a brand safety issue: you don't want your high-quality work adjacent to that slop.
https://retractionwatch.com/2025/02/10/vegetative-electron-microscopy-fingerprint-paper-mill/
Continued thread
Plus de détails sur l'accord avec Elsevier mentionné dans le billet.
Next · La recherche française signe avec Elsevier pour un montant de 134 millions d'euros sur 4 ans - NextLe consortium Couperin, qui réunit la plupart des universités et institutions de recherche française, a signé un accord avec l’éditeur scientifique Elsevier au montant astronomique de 134 millions d’euros sur quatre ans. Celui-ci comprend les abonnements aux revues de l’éditeur ainsi que les frais de publication en accès ouvert dans une partie des revues d’Elsevier […]
France Culture nous parle du juteux business des publications scientifiques.
France Culture · Le juteux business des publications scientifiquesSur 11 000 éditeurs scientifiques, 6 groupes internationaux représentent 40% d'un chiffre d'affaire mondial de 26 milliards de dollars et affichent un taux de rentabilité de 40% soit plus que la marque Apple. Ce business, de plus en plus lucratif depuis 20 ans, est aujourd'hui remis en cause.
From "Estimating global article processing charges paid to six publishers for open access between 2019 and 2023" by Haustein et al.:
"[We] estimate that, globally, a total of $8.349 billion ($8.968 billion in 2023 US dollars) were spent on APCs between 2019 and 2023."
About $9 billion USD over five years.
arXiv.orgEstimating global article processing charges paid to six publishers for open access between 2019 and 2023This study presents estimates of the global expenditure on article processing charges (APCs) paid to six publishers for open access between 2019 and 2023. APCs are fees charged for publishing in some fully open access journals (gold) and in subscription journals to make individual articles open access (hybrid). There is currently no way to systematically track institutional, national or global expenses for open access publishing due to a lack of transparency in APC prices, what articles they are paid for, or who pays them. We therefore curated and used an open dataset of annual APC list prices from Elsevier, Frontiers, MDPI, PLOS, Springer Nature, and Wiley in combination with the number of open access articles from these publishers indexed by OpenAlex to estimate that, globally, a total of \$8.349 billion (\$8.968 billion in 2023 US dollars) were spent on APCs between 2019 and 2023. We estimate that in 2023 MDPI (\$681.6 million), Elsevier (\$582.8 million) and Springer Nature (\$546.6) generated the most revenue with APCs. After adjusting for inflation, we also show that annual spending almost tripled from \$910.3 million in 2019 to \$2.538 billion in 2023, that hybrid exceed gold fees, and that the median APCs paid are higher than the median listed fees for both gold and hybrid. Our approach addresses major limitations in previous efforts to estimate APCs paid and offers much needed insight into an otherwise opaque aspect of the business of scholarly publishing. We call upon publishers to be more transparent about OA fees.
[Listening] "Le juteux business des publications scientifiques", sur Radio France; (6 min) dans le Journal de l'Eco !
https://www.radiofrance.fr/franceculture/podcasts/le-journal-de-l-eco/le-journal-de-l-eco-du-mardi-04-fevrier-2025-5860831
#publishing #veilleESR #research #elsevier #CostOfKowledge #openscience #oligopole #academicpublishing
France Culture · Le juteux business des publications scientifiquesSur 11 000 éditeurs scientifiques, 6 groupes internationaux représentent 40% d'un chiffre d'affaire mondial de 26 milliards de dollars et affichent un taux de rentabilité de 40% soit plus que la marque Apple. Ce business, de plus en plus lucratif depuis 20 ans, est aujourd'hui remis en cause.
Funder email:
“Information entered on Researchfish is collected on behalf of the funders and cannot be used for commercial purposes.”
Good to clarify this since #Researchfish is a product from Interfolio, who were acquired by the RELX company #Elsevier in 2022. As such they have a unique market advantage in handling data which is potentially commercially sensitive and that has been disclosed by grantees under mandate.
"Fundamentally, this is about what sort of system of #scholarly communication the research community (funders, institutions, individual researchers) wishes to be part of [...and...] in the spirit of not wasting a crisis, this represents an opportunity to reset the power imbalance between #libraries (and their institutions), and #publishers."
Why are universities ending the #Elsevier open access agreements?
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/02/03/why-are-universities-ending-the-elsevier-open-access-agreements/ #scholcomm #OpenAccess
Impact of Social Sciences · Why are universities ending their Elsevier open access agreements?After recent reporting that three UK universities had ended their transitional open access agreements with the publisher Elsevier, Peter Barr explains why academic libraries are making these decisi…
Have you seen this crazy shit from Elsevier? They can help fine-tune your university's performance into a highly efficient frictionless operation, all done like they're talking about sports cars, with an interview with an automotive designer. Academia Presente and Academia Futura!
