And then there is the argument that some just enjoy reviewing papers – pro bono or payment is not something they consider. They like the opportunity to be involved in cutting edge science albeit the very periphery, before it is widely distributed. Interesting how this relates somewhat to the debate about paying college athletes (http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/why-ncaa-athletes-shouldnt-be-paid).
Steve From: ECOLOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of David Duffy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: David Duffy <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM To: ECOLOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have! http://chronicle.com/article/Want-to-Change-Academic/134546?cid=trend_right_h "So why not try this: If academic work is to be commodified and turned into a source of profit for shareholders and for the 1 percent of the publishing world, then we should give up our archaic notions of unpaid craft labor and insist on professional compensation for our expertise, just as doctors, lawyers, and accountants do." -- David Duffy 戴大偉 (Dài Dàwěi) Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit/Makamakaʻāinana Botany University of Hawaii/Ke Kulanui o Hawaiʻi 3190 Maile Way Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA 1-808-956-8218
