Time to break academic publishing's stranglehold on research
Academic publishing is a favorite recurring topic on HN, and it&#x27;s one I&#x27;ve occasionally dipped into discussing, although these discussions are typically 99% one-sided and void of nuance or reasoned arguments. It&#x27;s like discussing politics online.<p>I&#x27;m a shareholder and board member of a large privately-held, family-owned academic publishing company. If anyone is interested in trying to understand what makes the industry work, why it&#x27;s so hard to disrupt it, etc. I&#x27;d love to engage or put you in touch with people within the industry smarter than me - my email is in my profile.<p>I know the industry is particularly frustrating to the HN crowd. We want to think it&#x27;s a technology problem - that distributing PDFs is a solved problem (which it obviously is). But the root of the problems (of which there are many) are all cultural and much harder to change. If you&#x27;re going to jump in and try to &quot;fix&quot; the industry or put publishers out of business, I highly encourage you to engage with folks in the industry with an open mind and really try to understand why things work the way they work. You&#x27;re not going to have any success unless you truly understand the incentive structure of academia and the social and cultural aspects of inertia that are at play. If you go in thinking you can build a better &quot;publishing&quot; mousetrap you will fail. You have to realize publishers are in the reputation business. And when you start peeling back the onion of how academics are assessed, given jobs, given tenure, etc you start seeing how hard changing behavior can be.