#apcs — Public Fediverse posts

Update. The passage in the #Trump budget criticizing expensive #subscriptions and #APCs (previous post, this thread) triggered a debate in the House of Representatives.

"US lawmakers intensify scrutiny of scientific-publishing practices."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-01251-y

"From ‘paper mills’ that sell authorships on fake or low-quality research papers to the costs associated with open-access publishing, US lawmakers are paying increasing attention to widely debated issues in scientific publishing. In a rare show of unity, members of the US House of Representatives from both sides of the political aisle agreed at a hearing that these issues deserve more attention from government — but there was less unity on what the solutions should be."

#OpenAccess #Publishing #ScholComm

Update. Here's the key passage from the new #Trump budget proposing a "Government-Wide Prohibition on Publishing and Subscription Fees." See p. 17.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/budget_fy2027.pdf

"The Budget ends the diversion of research dollars to high priced publishers across the Government. The Budget prohibits the use of Federal funds for expensive subscriptions to academic journals and prohibitively high publishing costs unless required by Federal statute or approved in advance by a Federal agency. Research funded by taxpayers should be publicly accessible; yet many publications charge the Government to both publish and to access the same research study. There are numerous low-cost outlets to make federally-funded research publicly available."

h/t Jim O'Donnell

#APCs #DoubleDipping #OpenAccess #Publishing #ScholComm #Subscriptions

#CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers. Good. Unfortunately its announcement is marred by false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess. news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026/04/01/w... I say more on Mastodon. fediscience.org/@petersuber/...

Why we won’t be funding open a...

#CancerResearchUK will stop paying #APCs for funded researchers.
https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026/04/01/why-we-wont-be-funding-open-access-publishing-any-more/

PS. So far, so good. There are strong reasons to move away from APCs. For a summary, see Recommendation 3 of the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement in 2022. (Disclosure: I was the lead author.)
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/#rec-3

Unfortunately the Cancer Research UK announcement is marred by several false assertions and assumptions about #OpenAccess.

* Its narrow decision is to stop funding APCs, but its headline is that it will stop funding OA publishing as such. It leaves the distinct false impression that all OA journals charge APCs.

* Deep in the text it says that OA "hasn't worked. At least not in its current form." That looks like a recognition that not all OA depends on APCs. But it isn't explicit and didn't prevent careless language elsewhere in the statement.

* It never acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, let alone that they constitute the majority of OA journals.

* It does acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA through repositories, or #GreenOA. But it falsely suggests that green OA must be embargoed. Just to give one notable set of counter-examples, all the federal OA policies in the US require unembargoed green OA.

#ScholComm

@johanrooryck.bsky.social just wrote an excellent reply to a range of objections and misunderstandings about #DiamondOA. doi.org/10.58079/15yxa #APCs #OpenAccess #ScholComm

Diamond OA, boutique or bazaar...

#JohanRooryck (@johanrooryck) just wrote an excellent reply to a range of objections and misunderstandings about #DiamondOA.
https://thd.hypotheses.org/560

#APCs #OpenAccess #ScholComm

🌐Christof Schöch, University of Trier, details how the #DOAJ journal #dataset is used to teach #Python programming for the Machine Learning in a Digital Humanities Master's program @christof

#PythonProgramming #APCs #DataClassiication #DataCleaning #MachineLearning
🔗 https://blog.doaj.org/2026/03/30/teaching-python-programming-with-doajs-journal-dataset/

Update. Here's an unrefereed letter to the editor protesting -- with justice -- that "top-ranked scientific publications [could] become the preserve of 'rich' groups." But it relies on the false assumption that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. Hence, it doesn't even mention #DiamondOA solutions to this problem.
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mbio.03659-25

Here's another article that made it through peer review (at #Elsevier) with the false claim that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs. www.journalofsurgicalresearch.com/article/S002... #ScholComm

Update. Here's another article that made it through peer review (at #Elsevier) with the false claim that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs.
https://www.journalofsurgicalresearch.com/article/S0022-4804(26)00045-4/abstract

I only have access to the abstract, not the full text. If I learn that the article acknowledges that no-APC OA (#DiamondOA) journals exist, and even outnumber APC-based OA journals, then I'll correct this post. But I'll still criticize the authors and editors for publishing a false claim in the abstract, namely, "Open access (OA) publishing…requires article processing charges (APCs)."

Today is the 24th birthday of the Budapest Open Access Initiative.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/

Best known for catalyzing the #OpenAccess movement in 2002, the BOAI has been continuously active and formed a nonprofit organization just last year.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/news/boai-transitioning-to-organization-to-support-the-development-of-equitable-open-access/

See the org's progress report on its first year.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/news/boai-celebrates-anniversary-and-reflects-on-progress-of-first-year-as-an-organization/

The latest version of the BOAI recommendations is its 20th anniversary statement.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/

In contrast to the earlier BOAI statements, which made many recommendations, the 20th anniversary statement deliberately focuses on a small number of top priorities:

1. Adopting #OpenInfrastructure
2. Reforming #ResearchAssessment
3. Moving away from #APCs
4. Moving away from #ReadAndPublish agreements.

I'm proud of my contributions to #BOAI (2002), #BOAI10 (2012), and #BOAI20 (2022), and honored to serve on the org steering committee.

Happy #ValentinesDay to all who work for #OpenAccess worldwide.

Update. Here's another piece critical of #APCs (so far, so good), and reviewing other people's criticisms of APCs (even better). Yet it makes the wholly false assertion that all #OpenAccess journals charge APCs. ("In open access, instead of readers having to pay, the paper’s authors cover the expenses of publication.") It says this even though it also summarizes a position explicitly referring to #DiamondOA journals. It never mentions that most OA journals do not charge APCs.
https://undark.org/2026/01/07/apc-science-publishing/

_Environmental Health Perspectives_ was a #DiamondOA journal formerly published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (#NIEHS, within the #NIH). When #Trump slashed the NIH and NIEHS budgets, the journal began the process of laying itself down. But now the American Chemical Society (#ACS) will adopt it. Under the ACS, it will remain #OpenAccess but start charging #APCs.

See the ACS announcement.
https://www.newswise.com/articles/environmental-health-perspectives-joins-the-acs-publications-portfolio

See the coverage in Chemistry World.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/leading-environmental-health-journal-defunded-by-trump-administration-has-been-saved/4022745.article

#Chemistry #Funding #USPol #USPolitics

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

From ⁨⁨⁨⁨⁨#AnnafromUkraine⁩⁩⁩⁩⁩ @[email protected]

#KREMLIN IN PANIC: RUSSIAN MILITARY CONVOYS AND STRATEGIC PLANTS ON FIRE Vlog 1267: War in #Ukraine

Defense Forces destroyed a russian mechanized column of 6 #tanks, 9 #IFVs, 5 #APCs, and 1 armored #recovery #vehicle. In the city of #Budyonnovsk, #Stavropol Krai, #Russia, a chemical #plant, #Stavrolen, is reportedly on fire, denotation continued very long.

#russoUkrainianWar

https://youtu.be/kahnDgbODIM

"Research Groups Oppose Capping #NIH Funding of Publisher Fees."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2025/12/16/research-groups-oppose-capping-nih-funding

PS: These universities seem to be saying: "We accept the growth of the APC model. We just need help paying APCs." They don't take any responsibility for steering authors toward high-prestige, high-JIF, high-APC journals, and don't acknowledge their ability to change those incentives while upholding their historic standards of quality. They could say instead, "We will revise our research assessment (promotion and tenure) procedures to focus on the quality of research more than where it is published." Insofar as universities succeed at shifting those incentives -- admittedly a long game -- authors could submit work to no-fee or diamond OA journals, bypass APC-based journals, and face no blowback from their P&T committees. All researchers and research institutions would win, including those institutions that now want govt help in paying APCs.

#Academia #AcademicMastodon #APCs #Assessment #DiamondOA #OAintheUSA #OpenAccess #ScholComm #Universities

Diethard Tautz and Paul Rainey propose criteria for journal quality entirely apart from citation impact and reputation. While you think over their proposal, don't overlook their case for some of the ways we'd benefit from having good criteria (no matter who first proposed them):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1038/s44319-025-00649-5

1. They could help us assess the justification for "public payments for journal services, such as #OpenAccess fees" or #APCs.

2. They could help "immunize against the predatory and fraudulent practices that are currently threatening the scientific publication system."

3. They could help funders "finance journals according to the Diamond open-access [#DiamondOA] standards as a basic infrastructure for science."

#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

Update. The #NIH just released the 914 public comments it received on its plan to cap the use of grant funds to pay #APCs.
https://osp.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Compiled-Public-Comments-on-the-RFI-on-Maximizing-Research-Funds-by-Limiting-Allowable-Publishing-Costs.pdf

#Funding #Medicine #OAintheUSA #ScholComm

"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

How should you refuse invitations to review manuscripts for journals with exorbitant #APCs? I see a lot of people who post their responses to the editor explaining why they refuse to take part in an unethical business enterprise. But what does this really accomplish?

Thanks to #SPARC (@sparc) for this new "Guide for Authors Complying with U.S. Federal Agency Public Access and Publisher Policies."
https://sparcopen.org/our-work/guide-for-authors-complying-with-policies/

Bottom line: Compliance with the US federal #OpenAccess policies is free of charge. Publishers who charge fed-funded authors a fee to make their work OA are charging to publish in their journals, not charging to comply with fed policy. You can publish elsewhere and avoid those fees.

#APCs #Funders #OAintheUSA #USA

12月17日-19日に、SEMIジャパンが日本最大の半導体産業の展示会 “SEMICON Japan 2025” を開催。東京都江東区・東京ビッグサイトにて。AI x Sustainability x Semiconductor Summit 、Metrology and Inspection Summit #MIS 、Advanced Packaging and Chiplet Summit #APCS 、Advanced Design Innovation Summit #ADIS 、Strategic Materials Conference #SMC を同時開催。詳細は https://www.semiconjapan.org/jp に。
#Semiconductor #Exhibition #SemiconJapan2025

New study: "Open access publishing: is urology ready? A survey of authors, readers, and editorial board’s knowledge, impressions and satisfaction."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00345-025-05928-3
(#paywalled)

Not a good way to run a survey or report the results.

* The results are paywalled.
* The article does not include the survey questions.
* The survey defines #GoldOA, #GreenOA, #DiamondOA, and #HybridOA. But the article only reports the attitudes toward APC-based gold OA. No surprise, they're negative. Yet disdain for #APCs only strengthens the reason to ask about green and diamond OA. If the survey did ask, then what are the answers? If it didn't ask, then why not?
* The survey gives a false definition of green OA, saying that it's always embargoed. That's especially odd since under current US federal agency policies, it's never embargoed.

#Embargoes #ScholComm

Unclear on the concept

This editorial in a #Wiley journal praises Wiley for promoting equitable #OpenAccess publishing in #LatinAmerica through #ReadAndPublish agreements that discount #APCs in proportion to national GDP.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.71964

PS: To me, equitable OA moves 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘺 from both APCs and read-and-publish agreements. For the arguments, see the Budapest Open Access Initiative 20th anniversary statement, especially recommendations 3 and 4.
https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/boai20/

#BOAI #BOAI20 #DEI #Publishing #ScholComm

New From the Team at #ScholCommLab NIH Explores Capping #APCs: Let’s Look at the Evidence https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2025/09/03/nih-apc-caps/ #publishing #scholcomm #libraries

The _Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing_ is converting from #hybrid to #APC-based #OpenAccess. One of its motives to escape the #DoubleDipping of the hybrid model. "Although this hybrid approach was well-intentioned, it created a paradoxical situation where institutions pay [and publishers receive] both subscription fees and publication charges."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10877-025-01342-7

PS: Glad to see it acknowledge the double dipping. Too many hybrid journals don't do that. Next step, escape the inequity and author-side barriers of the APC model.

#APCs #GoldOA #ReadAndPublish #ScholComm #SpringerNature

Urgh. Look at this dodgy journal marketing from IWA Publishing:

No Author Fees*

*No author fees: where institutionally supported, for authors from low-income countries, or for articles with significant societal impact

I think what IWA Publishing meant to say is that YES, this journal does charge author-side fees, but there are some ways in which these author-side fees can be avoided if you meet certain criteria.

DOAJ correctly displays that this journal charges APCs

#OpenAccess #APCs

"#Delta moves toward eliminating set prices in favor of #AI that determines how much you personally will pay for a ticket."
https://fortune.com/2025/07/16/delta-moves-toward-eliminating-set-prices-in-favor-of-ai-that-determines-how-much-you-personally-will-pay-for-a-ticket/

PS: Lots to hate here. But suppose the model spreads to other industries. (Yes, this is sci-fi for now. But let your imagination run free.) Imagine that academic #publishers used this model to set #APCs. What would AI tools infer from your institutional affiliation (about available resources), first name (about gender), surname (about ethnicity), submitted manuscript (about guesstimated quality), and past publications (about specialization, reputation, impact)? What odd variables would it factor in, such as the number of Trump-banned words (for political protection) or the number of citations to that journal (for #JIF)? How would it use all this information? Would it lower the #APC for you, to bring you in, or raise it, to price you out?

For airlines or journals, would there be any reason to stick with the model if it didn't raise net revenues?

#Economics #Prices #ScholComm

"#Delta moves toward eliminating set prices in favor of #AI that determines how much you personally will pay for a ticket."
https://fortune.com/2025/07/16/delta-moves-toward-eliminating-set-prices-in-favor-of-ai-that-determines-how-much-you-personally-will-pay-for-a-ticket/

PS: Lots to hate here. But suppose the model spreads to other industries. (Yes, this is sci-fi for now. But let your imagination run free.) Imagine that academic #publishers used this model to set #APCs. What would AI tools infer from your institutional affiliation (about available resources), first name (about gender), surname (about ethnicity), submitted manuscript (about guesstimated quality), and past publications (about specialization, reputation, impact)? What odd variables would it factor in, such as the number of Trump-banned words (for political protection) or the number of citations to that journal (for #JIF)? How would it use all this information? Would it lower the #APC for you, to bring you in, or raise it, to price you out?

For airlines or journals, would there be any reason to stick with the model if it didn't raise net revenues?

#Economics #Prices #ScholComm

"#Delta moves toward eliminating set prices in favor of #AI that determines how much you personally will pay for a ticket."
https://fortune.com/2025/07/16/delta-moves-toward-eliminating-set-prices-in-favor-of-ai-that-determines-how-much-you-personally-will-pay-for-a-ticket/

PS: Lots to hate here. But suppose the model spreads to other industries. (Yes, this is sci-fi for now. But let your imagination run free.) Imagine that academic #publishers used this model to set #APCs. What would AI tools infer from your institutional affiliation (about available resources), first name (about gender), surname (about ethnicity), submitted manuscript (about guesstimated quality), and past publications (about specialization, reputation, impact)? What odd variables would it factor in, such as the number of Trump-banned words (for political protection) or the number of citations to that journal (for #JIF)? How would it use all this information? Would it lower the #APC for you, to bring you in, or raise it, to price you out?

For airlines or journals, would there be any reason to stick with the model if it didn't raise net revenues?

#Economics #Prices #ScholComm

"#Delta moves toward eliminating set prices in favor of #AI that determines how much you personally will pay for a ticket."
https://fortune.com/2025/07/16/delta-moves-toward-eliminating-set-prices-in-favor-of-ai-that-determines-how-much-you-personally-will-pay-for-a-ticket/

PS: Lots to hate here. But suppose the model spreads to other industries. (Yes, this is sci-fi for now. But let your imagination run free.) Imagine that academic #publishers used this model to set #APCs. What would AI tools infer from your institutional affiliation (about available resources), first name (about gender), surname (about ethnicity), submitted manuscript (about guesstimated quality), and past publications (about specialization, reputation, impact)? What odd variables would it factor in, such as the number of Trump-banned words (for political protection) or the number of citations to that journal (for #JIF)? How would it use all this information? Would it lower the #APC for you, to bring you in, or raise it, to price you out?

For airlines or journals, would there be any reason to stick with the model if it didn't raise net revenues?

#Economics #Prices #ScholComm

"#Delta moves toward eliminating set prices in favor of #AI that determines how much you personally will pay for a ticket."
https://fortune.com/2025/07/16/delta-moves-toward-eliminating-set-prices-in-favor-of-ai-that-determines-how-much-you-personally-will-pay-for-a-ticket/

PS: Lots to hate here. But suppose the model spreads to other industries. (Yes, this is sci-fi for now. But let your imagination run free.) Imagine that academic #publishers used this model to set #APCs. What would AI tools infer from your institutional affiliation (about available resources), first name (about gender), surname (about ethnicity), submitted manuscript (about guesstimated quality), and past publications (about specialization, reputation, impact)? What odd variables would it factor in, such as the number of Trump-banned words (for political protection) or the number of citations to that journal (for #JIF)? How would it use all this information? Would it lower the #APC for you, to bring you in, or raise it, to price you out?

For airlines or journals, would there be any reason to stick with the model if it didn't raise net revenues?

#Economics #Prices #ScholComm

The Royal Society of Chemistry (#RSC) just issued a vague and puzzling statement about its plans.
https://www.rsc.org/news/our-evolving-approach-to-open-access

It once planned to convert all its journals to #OpenAccess by 2028. By which it apparently meant #APC-based OA. But after talking with customers in different parts of the world, it learned that some regions "are not yet ready for fully OA." By which it means APC-based OA. "The resounding message we heard over and over is that one size cannot fit all." By which it means that not all can pay APCs.

"It became clear that we needed to adapt our vision for openness to account for a landscape that is increasing in complexity and no longer coalescing around a single direction for open research." As if the global landscape had ever coalesced around support for APCs.

But RSC is still committed to some kind of transition to OA. "We are now shaping our future OA approach to support authors in ways that suit them best in a local context."

If it plans to support no-APC forms of OA, it carefully avoids saying so. It never mentions #GreenOA and never endorses #DiamondOA. (It mentions one diamond OA initiative in Africa, but it's not an RSC initiative.)

I'm guessing that it plans to rely on locally customized #ReadAndPublish agreements. (I've argued that all such agreements use APCs in disguise.) But if so, why not say so? If it has other models in mind for regions "not ready" for APC-based OA, why not say what they are?

#APCs #South #ScholComm

Update. Here's a piece by the senior publisher at @ioppublishing (#IOPP) trying to entice authors to look beyond journal impact factors (#JIFs) when choosing a publisher. It pushes #OpenAccess as an important factor to consider. So far, so good. It mentions high #APCs as a potential barrier, but points to #waivers in mitigation. (IOPP offers waivers.) It never mentions #DiamondOA. (IOPP doesn't offer no-fee OA journals.) And of course it never mentions #GreenOA.
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20240726092407654

I'm still surprised to see articles on #OpenAccess journals that decry the problem of #APCs, acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA journals (#DiamondOA), but recommend wider adoption of APC #waivers rather than wider support for no-APC journals.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772529423000383