#apcs — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #apcs, aggregated by home.social.
-
Lothar Nunnenmacher from @Lib4RI discusses the development of their unified search tool that integrates diverse data sources, including DOAJ #metadata, to help researchers navigate complex #OA publishing options #libraries #DiamondOA #APCs
▶️ Read more here https://blog.doaj.org/2026/07/02/why-accurate-doaj-metadata-matters-insights-from-lib4ri/ -
Lothar Nunnenmacher from @Lib4RI discusses the development of their unified search tool that integrates diverse data sources, including DOAJ #metadata, to help researchers navigate complex #OA publishing options #libraries #DiamondOA #APCs
▶️ Read more here https://blog.doaj.org/2026/07/02/why-accurate-doaj-metadata-matters-insights-from-lib4ri/ -
Lothar Nunnenmacher from @Lib4RI discusses the development of their unified search tool that integrates diverse data sources, including DOAJ #metadata, to help researchers navigate complex #OA publishing options #libraries #DiamondOA #APCs
▶️ Read more here https://blog.doaj.org/2026/07/02/why-accurate-doaj-metadata-matters-insights-from-lib4ri/ -
Lothar Nunnenmacher from @Lib4RI discusses the development of their unified search tool that integrates diverse data sources, including DOAJ #metadata, to help researchers navigate complex #OA publishing options #libraries #DiamondOA #APCs
▶️ Read more here https://blog.doaj.org/2026/07/02/why-accurate-doaj-metadata-matters-insights-from-lib4ri/ -
Lothar Nunnenmacher from @Lib4RI discusses the development of their unified search tool that integrates diverse data sources, including DOAJ #metadata, to help researchers navigate complex #OA publishing options #libraries #DiamondOA #APCs
▶️ Read more here https://blog.doaj.org/2026/07/02/why-accurate-doaj-metadata-matters-insights-from-lib4ri/ -
Watching with interest:
"Federal lawsuit accuses four major publishers of extorting article processing charges."
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/31/federal-lawsuit-major-publishers-article-processing-charges-false-claims-act/"A lawsuit filed under the U.S. False Claims Act accuses four major publishers of perpetrating a decade-long scheme to defraud the government by charging exorbitant #APCs. The case…claims Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Informa [Taylor & Francis] forced U.S. research institutions to submit false claims to the government for reimbursement through article fees up to 10 times the cost of processing the articles."
-
Watching with interest:
"Federal lawsuit accuses four major publishers of extorting article processing charges."
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/31/federal-lawsuit-major-publishers-article-processing-charges-false-claims-act/"A lawsuit filed under the U.S. False Claims Act accuses four major publishers of perpetrating a decade-long scheme to defraud the government by charging exorbitant #APCs. The case…claims Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Informa [Taylor & Francis] forced U.S. research institutions to submit false claims to the government for reimbursement through article fees up to 10 times the cost of processing the articles."
-
Watching with interest:
"Federal lawsuit accuses four major publishers of extorting article processing charges."
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/31/federal-lawsuit-major-publishers-article-processing-charges-false-claims-act/"A lawsuit filed under the U.S. False Claims Act accuses four major publishers of perpetrating a decade-long scheme to defraud the government by charging exorbitant #APCs. The case…claims Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Informa [Taylor & Francis] forced U.S. research institutions to submit false claims to the government for reimbursement through article fees up to 10 times the cost of processing the articles."
-
Watching with interest:
"Federal lawsuit accuses four major publishers of extorting article processing charges."
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/31/federal-lawsuit-major-publishers-article-processing-charges-false-claims-act/"A lawsuit filed under the U.S. False Claims Act accuses four major publishers of perpetrating a decade-long scheme to defraud the government by charging exorbitant #APCs. The case…claims Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Informa [Taylor & Francis] forced U.S. research institutions to submit false claims to the government for reimbursement through article fees up to 10 times the cost of processing the articles."
-
Watching with interest:
"Federal lawsuit accuses four major publishers of extorting article processing charges."
https://retractionwatch.com/2026/07/31/federal-lawsuit-major-publishers-article-processing-charges-false-claims-act/"A lawsuit filed under the U.S. False Claims Act accuses four major publishers of perpetrating a decade-long scheme to defraud the government by charging exorbitant #APCs. The case…claims Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Informa [Taylor & Francis] forced U.S. research institutions to submit false claims to the government for reimbursement through article fees up to 10 times the cost of processing the articles."
-
@ombialik
You're right that the OA journals in which many people want to publish charge #APCs. That depends on many factors, like the person's field and the incentives created by the person's institution (e.g. promotion and tenure committee).But it's still true that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
It's easy to speak precisely, and recommend preprints without leaving the false impression that all or most OA journals charge APCs.
-
@ombialik
You're right that the OA journals in which many people want to publish charge #APCs. That depends on many factors, like the person's field and the incentives created by the person's institution (e.g. promotion and tenure committee).But it's still true that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
It's easy to speak precisely, and recommend preprints without leaving the false impression that all or most OA journals charge APCs.
-
@ombialik
You're right that the OA journals in which many people want to publish charge #APCs. That depends on many factors, like the person's field and the incentives created by the person's institution (e.g. promotion and tenure committee).But it's still true that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
It's easy to speak precisely, and recommend preprints without leaving the false impression that all or most OA journals charge APCs.
-
@ombialik
You're right that the OA journals in which many people want to publish charge #APCs. That depends on many factors, like the person's field and the incentives created by the person's institution (e.g. promotion and tenure committee).But it's still true that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
It's easy to speak precisely, and recommend preprints without leaving the false impression that all or most OA journals charge APCs.
-
@ombialik
You're right that the OA journals in which many people want to publish charge #APCs. That depends on many factors, like the person's field and the incentives created by the person's institution (e.g. promotion and tenure committee).But it's still true that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
It's easy to speak precisely, and recommend preprints without leaving the false impression that all or most OA journals charge APCs.
-
@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).
-
@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).
-
@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).
-
@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).
-
@ombialik
I completely support the message about preprints.But please don't perpetuate the myth that all or even most #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Most do not charge APCs (#DiamondOA). And OA repositories never charge APCs (#GreenOA).
-
A new study finds that by 2023, APC-based #OpenAccess articles had surpassed paywalled subscription articles in #retractions.
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.763The study does not blame OA as such. It blames the APC business model.
"These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control."
-
A new study finds that by 2023, APC-based #OpenAccess articles had surpassed paywalled subscription articles in #retractions.
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.763The study does not blame OA as such. It blames the APC business model.
"These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control."
-
A new study finds that by 2023, APC-based #OpenAccess articles had surpassed paywalled subscription articles in #retractions.
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.763The study does not blame OA as such. It blames the APC business model.
"These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control."
-
A new study finds that by 2023, APC-based #OpenAccess articles had surpassed paywalled subscription articles in #retractions.
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.763The study does not blame OA as such. It blames the APC business model.
"These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control."
-
A new study finds that by 2023, APC-based #OpenAccess articles had surpassed paywalled subscription articles in #retractions.
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.763The study does not blame OA as such. It blames the APC business model.
"These findings raise concerns about APC‑based publishing models that directly link publisher revenue to publication volume, creating structural tensions for editorial oversight and quality control."
-
But note this nuance. While most #OpenAccess journals (today 62%) charge no APCs, most articles published in OA journals (today 72%) are published in APC-based OA journals.
Thanks to the research of @waltcrawford for the second number. See p. 6.
https://waltcrawford.name/goa26.pdf -
But note this nuance. While most #OpenAccess journals (today 62%) charge no APCs, most articles published in OA journals (today 72%) are published in APC-based OA journals.
Thanks to the research of @waltcrawford for the second number. See p. 6.
https://waltcrawford.name/goa26.pdf -
But note this nuance. While most #OpenAccess journals (today 62%) charge no APCs, most articles published in OA journals (today 72%) are published in APC-based OA journals.
Thanks to the research of @waltcrawford for the second number. See p. 6.
https://waltcrawford.name/goa26.pdf -
But note this nuance. While most #OpenAccess journals (today 62%) charge no APCs, most articles published in OA journals (today 72%) are published in APC-based OA journals.
Thanks to the research of @waltcrawford for the second number. See p. 6.
https://waltcrawford.name/goa26.pdf -
But note this nuance. While most #OpenAccess journals (today 62%) charge no APCs, most articles published in OA journals (today 72%) are published in APC-based OA journals.
Thanks to the research of @waltcrawford for the second number. See p. 6.
https://waltcrawford.name/goa26.pdf -
As of today, the Directory of Open Access Journals (#DOAJ @DOAJ) lists 23,131 peer-reviewed #OpenAccess journals, of which 14,347 charge no #APCs. Hence, 62% of these OA journals are no-fee or #DiamondOA.
http://www.doaj.org/You can get the latest raw numbers any time you want on the DOAJ front page, and the percentage is an easy calculation. Please correct people who say or assume that all or even most OA journals charge APCs. Most do not.
-
As of today, the Directory of Open Access Journals (#DOAJ @DOAJ) lists 23,131 peer-reviewed #OpenAccess journals, of which 14,347 charge no #APCs. Hence, 62% of these OA journals are no-fee or #DiamondOA.
http://www.doaj.org/You can get the latest raw numbers any time you want on the DOAJ front page, and the percentage is an easy calculation. Please correct people who say or assume that all or even most OA journals charge APCs. Most do not.
-
As of today, the Directory of Open Access Journals (#DOAJ @DOAJ) lists 23,131 peer-reviewed #OpenAccess journals, of which 14,347 charge no #APCs. Hence, 62% of these OA journals are no-fee or #DiamondOA.
http://www.doaj.org/You can get the latest raw numbers any time you want on the DOAJ front page, and the percentage is an easy calculation. Please correct people who say or assume that all or even most OA journals charge APCs. Most do not.
-
As of today, the Directory of Open Access Journals (#DOAJ @DOAJ) lists 23,131 peer-reviewed #OpenAccess journals, of which 14,347 charge no #APCs. Hence, 62% of these OA journals are no-fee or #DiamondOA.
http://www.doaj.org/You can get the latest raw numbers any time you want on the DOAJ front page, and the percentage is an easy calculation. Please correct people who say or assume that all or even most OA journals charge APCs. Most do not.
-
As of today, the Directory of Open Access Journals (#DOAJ @DOAJ) lists 23,131 peer-reviewed #OpenAccess journals, of which 14,347 charge no #APCs. Hence, 62% of these OA journals are no-fee or #DiamondOA.
http://www.doaj.org/You can get the latest raw numbers any time you want on the DOAJ front page, and the percentage is an easy calculation. Please correct people who say or assume that all or even most OA journals charge APCs. Most do not.
-
2/ Three highlights:
* In general, with few exceptions, funders could not pay #APCs. § 200.461. (This decides the question still under consideration at the #NIH, and applies the answer to NIH and all other covered agencies.)
* Grants could be terminated "mid-award" for "discretionary reasons" including decisions by political appointees that the grants no longer serve agency priorities. § 200.340.
* Grants "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities." They must not encourage racial preferences or illegal immigration, deny that sex is binary, or promote "anti-American values". When multiple grant applications are equally strong, "preference…should be given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates." Grantees must commit to follow existing guidance on #GoldStandardScience. "Senior [political] appointees…must not ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the recommendations of others [like peer reviewers], but must instead use their independent judgment when evaluating Federal award proposals." § 200.205.
#DefendResearch #Funding #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
2/ Three highlights:
* In general, with few exceptions, funders could not pay #APCs. § 200.461. (This decides the question still under consideration at the #NIH, and applies the answer to NIH and all other covered agencies.)
* Grants could be terminated "mid-award" for "discretionary reasons" including decisions by political appointees that the grants no longer serve agency priorities. § 200.340.
* Grants "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities." They must not encourage racial preferences or illegal immigration, deny that sex is binary, or promote "anti-American values". When multiple grant applications are equally strong, "preference…should be given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates." Grantees must commit to follow existing guidance on #GoldStandardScience. "Senior [political] appointees…must not ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the recommendations of others [like peer reviewers], but must instead use their independent judgment when evaluating Federal award proposals." § 200.205.
#DefendResearch #Funding #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
2/ Three highlights:
* In general, with few exceptions, funders could not pay #APCs. § 200.461. (This decides the question still under consideration at the #NIH, and applies the answer to NIH and all other covered agencies.)
* Grants could be terminated "mid-award" for "discretionary reasons" including decisions by political appointees that the grants no longer serve agency priorities. § 200.340.
* Grants "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities." They must not encourage racial preferences or illegal immigration, deny that sex is binary, or promote "anti-American values". When multiple grant applications are equally strong, "preference…should be given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates." Grantees must commit to follow existing guidance on #GoldStandardScience. "Senior [political] appointees…must not ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the recommendations of others [like peer reviewers], but must instead use their independent judgment when evaluating Federal award proposals." § 200.205.
#DefendResearch #Funding #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
2/ Three highlights:
* In general, with few exceptions, funders could not pay #APCs. § 200.461. (This decides the question still under consideration at the #NIH, and applies the answer to NIH and all other covered agencies.)
* Grants could be terminated "mid-award" for "discretionary reasons" including decisions by political appointees that the grants no longer serve agency priorities. § 200.340.
* Grants "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities." They must not encourage racial preferences or illegal immigration, deny that sex is binary, or promote "anti-American values". When multiple grant applications are equally strong, "preference…should be given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates." Grantees must commit to follow existing guidance on #GoldStandardScience. "Senior [political] appointees…must not ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the recommendations of others [like peer reviewers], but must instead use their independent judgment when evaluating Federal award proposals." § 200.205.
#DefendResearch #Funding #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
2/ Three highlights:
* In general, with few exceptions, funders could not pay #APCs. § 200.461. (This decides the question still under consideration at the #NIH, and applies the answer to NIH and all other covered agencies.)
* Grants could be terminated "mid-award" for "discretionary reasons" including decisions by political appointees that the grants no longer serve agency priorities. § 200.340.
* Grants "must, where applicable, demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities." They must not encourage racial preferences or illegal immigration, deny that sex is binary, or promote "anti-American values". When multiple grant applications are equally strong, "preference…should be given to institutions with lower indirect cost rates." Grantees must commit to follow existing guidance on #GoldStandardScience. "Senior [political] appointees…must not ministerially ratify or routinely defer to the recommendations of others [like peer reviewers], but must instead use their independent judgment when evaluating Federal award proposals." § 200.205.
#DefendResearch #Funding #Trump #TrumpVResearch #USPol #USPolitics
-
Please don't overfeed your armored transports, it's not healthy for them 😭
-
Please don't overfeed your armored transports, it's not healthy for them 😭
-
Please don't overfeed your armored transports, it's not healthy for them 😭
-
Please don't overfeed your armored transports, it's not healthy for them 😭
-
Please don't overfeed your armored transports, it's not healthy for them 😭
-
-
Ahhhhh I'm AbrOOOMsING!
https://piefed.social/c/noncredibledefense/p/2087673/ahhhhh-i-m-abrooomsing
-
-
Ahhhhh I'm AbrOOOMsING!
https://piefed.social/c/noncredibledefense/p/2087673/ahhhhh-i-m-abrooomsing
-
-
Update. Also see the excellent #SPARC response to the #GAO report.
https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/sparc-statement-on-gao-report-gao-26-107738-federal-research-publishing-costs-may-2026/"We urge Congress and federal agencies to:
1. Distinguish public access from pay-to-publish…
2. Recognize that pay-to-publish doesn’t just cost the government and taxpayers more; it compromises the science it purports to support…
3. Decline to treat current market conditions as fixed…." -
Update. Also see the excellent #SPARC response to the #GAO report.
https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/sparc-statement-on-gao-report-gao-26-107738-federal-research-publishing-costs-may-2026/"We urge Congress and federal agencies to:
1. Distinguish public access from pay-to-publish…
2. Recognize that pay-to-publish doesn’t just cost the government and taxpayers more; it compromises the science it purports to support…
3. Decline to treat current market conditions as fixed…." -
Update. Also see the excellent #SPARC response to the #GAO report.
https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/sparc-statement-on-gao-report-gao-26-107738-federal-research-publishing-costs-may-2026/"We urge Congress and federal agencies to:
1. Distinguish public access from pay-to-publish…
2. Recognize that pay-to-publish doesn’t just cost the government and taxpayers more; it compromises the science it purports to support…
3. Decline to treat current market conditions as fixed…." -
Update. Also see the excellent #SPARC response to the #GAO report.
https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/sparc-statement-on-gao-report-gao-26-107738-federal-research-publishing-costs-may-2026/"We urge Congress and federal agencies to:
1. Distinguish public access from pay-to-publish…
2. Recognize that pay-to-publish doesn’t just cost the government and taxpayers more; it compromises the science it purports to support…
3. Decline to treat current market conditions as fixed…." -
Update. Also see the excellent #SPARC response to the #GAO report.
https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/sparc-statement-on-gao-report-gao-26-107738-federal-research-publishing-costs-may-2026/"We urge Congress and federal agencies to:
1. Distinguish public access from pay-to-publish…
2. Recognize that pay-to-publish doesn’t just cost the government and taxpayers more; it compromises the science it purports to support…
3. Decline to treat current market conditions as fixed…." -
The US Government Accountability Office (#GAO) just reviewed the #OpenAccess policies at nine federal agencies.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107738A few highlights:
* Among other things, GAO looked for compliance with the #NelsonMemo. This is further evidence that the #Trump admin supports the memo.
* It encourages #NSF and #USDA to go further to ensure #reuse rights. (That would be good.) But it assumes that the other agencies are already doing enough to ensure reuse rights. (I can't agree with this.)
* It praises #NIH for taking steps to reduce money spent on grantee #APCs, and encourages other agencies to follow the NIH lead on this.
* In a few places it leaves the false impression (1) that all OA journals charge APCs and (2) that all publishers are responding the federal policies by charging APCs to publish fed-funded research.
-
The US Government Accountability Office (#GAO) just reviewed the #OpenAccess policies at nine federal agencies.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107738A few highlights:
* Among other things, GAO looked for compliance with the #NelsonMemo. This is further evidence that the #Trump admin supports the memo.
* It encourages #NSF and #USDA to go further to ensure #reuse rights. (That would be good.) But it assumes that the other agencies are already doing enough to ensure reuse rights. (I can't agree with this.)
* It praises #NIH for taking steps to reduce money spent on grantee #APCs, and encourages other agencies to follow the NIH lead on this.
* In a few places it leaves the false impression (1) that all OA journals charge APCs and (2) that all publishers are responding the federal policies by charging APCs to publish fed-funded research.
-
The US Government Accountability Office (#GAO) just reviewed the #OpenAccess policies at nine federal agencies.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107738A few highlights:
* Among other things, GAO looked for compliance with the #NelsonMemo. This is further evidence that the #Trump admin supports the memo.
* It encourages #NSF and #USDA to go further to ensure #reuse rights. (That would be good.) But it assumes that the other agencies are already doing enough to ensure reuse rights. (I can't agree with this.)
* It praises #NIH for taking steps to reduce money spent on grantee #APCs, and encourages other agencies to follow the NIH lead on this.
* In a few places it leaves the false impression (1) that all OA journals charge APCs and (2) that all publishers are responding the federal policies by charging APCs to publish fed-funded research.
-
The US Government Accountability Office (#GAO) just reviewed the #OpenAccess policies at nine federal agencies.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107738A few highlights:
* Among other things, GAO looked for compliance with the #NelsonMemo. This is further evidence that the #Trump admin supports the memo.
* It encourages #NSF and #USDA to go further to ensure #reuse rights. (That would be good.) But it assumes that the other agencies are already doing enough to ensure reuse rights. (I can't agree with this.)
* It praises #NIH for taking steps to reduce money spent on grantee #APCs, and encourages other agencies to follow the NIH lead on this.
* In a few places it leaves the false impression (1) that all OA journals charge APCs and (2) that all publishers are responding the federal policies by charging APCs to publish fed-funded research.
-
The US Government Accountability Office (#GAO) just reviewed the #OpenAccess policies at nine federal agencies.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-107738A few highlights:
* Among other things, GAO looked for compliance with the #NelsonMemo. This is further evidence that the #Trump admin supports the memo.
* It encourages #NSF and #USDA to go further to ensure #reuse rights. (That would be good.) But it assumes that the other agencies are already doing enough to ensure reuse rights. (I can't agree with this.)
* It praises #NIH for taking steps to reduce money spent on grantee #APCs, and encourages other agencies to follow the NIH lead on this.
* In a few places it leaves the false impression (1) that all OA journals charge APCs and (2) that all publishers are responding the federal policies by charging APCs to publish fed-funded research.