For crying out loud, I am still getting crappy spammy mail from various “Bentham Open” journals. The most annoying part to me of Bentham Open is that they try to make it seem that anything published in an Open Access journal is better than anything published in a non Open Access journal. While I personally believe publishing in an OA manner is great, lying about the benefits of OA is not a good thing.
For example they ask and answer the following question “WHY PUBLISH IN OPEN ACCESS JOURNALS? ” Their answers include:
- Your article will obtain more citations.
- Your article will be peer-reviewed and published very fast.
- Your article can be read by potentially millions of readers, which is incomparable to publishing in a traditional subscription journal.
- All published open access articles will receive massive international exposure and as is usually the case for open access publications, articles will also receive high citations.
Yes, that is right, the crappiest, most boring, most idiotic article in an OA journal will receive “massive international exposure” and “high citations.”
I know, criticism of Bentham Open may seem biased coming from me, a PLoS insider. So, just in case you were not aware that just about everyone else out there cannot stand them, here are some reading assignments:
- A short post about Bentham Open
- Editor will quit over hoax paper : Nature News
- Spam journals or open journals?
- Re: Bentham Science Publishers
- Gunther Eysenbach’s random research rants: Black sheep among Open
- Some background on Bentham Open, but just some – Peter Suber, Open …
- Open and Shut?: The Open Access Interviews: Matthew Honan
- Jeffrey Beall, summed up by Peter Suber.
And so on.