- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Victorycabal: nobody's proposing a non-peer-reviewed system. It's perfectly possible to construct peer-review models that are consistent with open access. Example: the physics community has been archiving preprints of its work online since the mid-90s. A physicist posts a new paper to the community's website, and other physicists comment on it. In essence, the entire community of researchers conducts peer review on everybody else's papers. The niche for "traditional" journals in physics has become copy-of-record, rather than peer review - and those journals still have subscriptions, and still make money. Where's the problem here?
