Journal expense (was: Re: CHE reports new plan ...) Steve Black 26 Jun 1998 18:58 UTC
Mr. Henderson of Publishing Research Quarterly (seconded by Mr. Cohen of Haworth Press) made important points concerning the need for administrators to provide adequate support for library resources. But the other side of the argument is that journals should be cost effective. The Chronicle of Higher Education article (June 16, 1988, p. A12) includes a defense by Elsevier of the expense of their titles--"Running an international journal with peer review and archiving are all very complex issues. They aren't simple or cheap." We librarians understand that. Sometimes I've wanted to put a banner up in a public area of the library that says "Good Information is Expensive to Produce". It's one of those things we think everyone should know, but they don't. My issue with Mr. Henderson's eloquently expressed point of view is that libraries deserve to get what our administrators pay for, and that not all publishers' journals offer good value. For instance, if a journal is supposed to have 4 issues per volume, there should be 4 real issues, not combined issues manipulated to receive the full subscription price for fewer issues than one would expect. If a publisher chooses to have approximately 20 articles per volume, and pad each one with numerous pages of self-promotional material, the subscription price should reflect the amount of scholarly content being offered. It is the proper duty of librarians, working with faculty, to determine whether the price of a journal is justified by its scholarly content. Of course administrators should fund cost-effective journals. But they should not be expected to unquestioningly pay for journals no matter the subscription price. I think it would be to the benefit of all stakeholders if journal publishers made public their costs. Publishers stand on very solid ground when high subscription prices are due to the expense of producing high quality information. So if the seemingly excessive inflation we are seeing year after year is covering the cost of peer review, production, archiving, etc., fine. If not, we have reason to gripe, and reason to cancel. These opinions are strictly my own, not those of my institution. On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Bill Cohen wrote: > Dear Mr. Henderson: > > Bravo for the insightful piece of university self-serving in the midst of > library budget cutbacks! > > Bill Cohen, Publisher > The Haworth Press, Inc. > <BCohen7719@AOL.COM> ************************************************************************ Steve Black Reference, Serials and Instruction Librarian Neil Hellman Library 392 Western Ave. The College of Saint Rose Albany, NY 12203 "Cogito eggo sum" blacks@rosnet.strose.edu (I think, therefore I waffle)