Re: OASPA responds to submission prank in OA journal

[Phil Davis <pmd8@cornell.edu>]

I see how the OASPA wishes to to reframe this story as a "prank" 
hoping to tarnish those willing to uncover a potential abuse of 
the trust relationship between academics and academic publishers. 
There needs to be accountability in the system, especially if 
libraries and grant-funding agencies are so willing to provide 
publishing fees for open access ventures.  Other news sources 
frame this story in other ways, none of them attempt to blame the 
messengers, e.g.

Spoof paper accepted by 'peer-reviewed' journal

The New Scientist
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17288-spoof-paper-accepted-by-peerreviewed-journal.html

Fake paper tests peer review at open-access journal
http://www.boston.com/news/health/blog/2009/06/phony_paper_tes.html

Editors quit after fake paper flap
http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55759/

--Phil Davis

Philip M. Davis
PhD Student
Department of Communication
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
email: pmd8@cornell.edu
phone: 607 255-2124
https://confluence.cornell.edu/display/~pmd8/resume
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/author/pmd8/



Caroline Sutton wrote:

> The Open Access Scholarly Publisher's Association (OASPA) has 
> responded to the recent prank involving the submission - and 
> reported acceptance - of a computer-generated paper to The Open 
> Information Science Journal, published by Bentham Science.
>
> As noted in the blog piece, one of the key incentives behind 
> establishing OASPA was a desire to ensure high standards among 
> Open Access publishers.