Daniel Marovitz has written an article describing a number of reasons that science journals no longer make sense for science, and how they may be holding science back from the age of technology. The article is on Wired.com’s InnovationInsights.
Technology has helped so many industries evolve over the past few decades, but scientific publishing, surprisingly, has hardly changed since the first journal article in 1665. They must; their day is done. Their continuing existence damages science.
Marovitz includes the following reasons, and great explanations for each:
1 – The use of an arbiter (Editor) in science
2 – Extensive delays
3 – The public trust –
4 – Anonymous peer review
5 – Missing data
Marovitz closes the article with a plea for publication of science to embrace the age of the internet:
It is time for publishing — the sole window through which science is made visible to the world — to embrace the open culture of the Internet. In an age of serious global challenges, science will continue to be the source for answers. Those answers must be delivered with speed, fairness, transparency, and freedom from bias. The scientific journal is a relic of another age.