MIT can honor Aaron Swartz by fighting to make journals open to everyone
I'm not a fan of linking major cultural or ideological issues to specific tragedies in this way. If open access is a good idea on the merits, then the merits are where the battle will be won or lost.The article points out one reason to not provide open access: the difficulty of financing peer-reviewed publishing if subscriptions are free. If there is not a good solution for that problem, the emotional appeal of "do it for Aaron" will not be enough to win--especially because the people who feel the greatest emotional attachment to Aaron are the people who already agreed with him.The rallying cry "do it for [person]" is usually only effective at rallying the troops who are already on your side, not convincing the other side.