Profitable publishers benefit from publishing

If the Association of American Publishers is trying to shake off a reputation of disinformation - they'll have to try harder.

In a letter to the CHINFO discussion list, as reported on Open Access News, a statement from the AAP scholarly publishing division says:

Private sector non-profit and commercial publishers serve researchers and scientists by managing and funding the peer review process...

This is nonsense! Publishers do not fund the peer review process. First, peer review is not funded at all, but rather done on a voluntary basis.

Second, profitable publishers (there are both commercial and not-for-profit publishers who fit this description) do not fund the coordination of peer review; rather, they reap profits from the service they provide. In a financial sense, they do not give; they take.

If saying that one is funding a service, when the reality is that one is reaping profits from the service, is not disinformation - what is?

This post reflects my personal opinion only and does not represent the opinions or policy of the BC Electronic Library Network or the Simon Fraser University Library.