Reflection: Free Access Content, the Good & Bad

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L5rVH1KGBCY

Progressively as I explore this topic on Open Access Content (OA), I came to realise that most of us have been taking information found online for granted. Being able to access research articles at no cost benefits many, and especially a blessing for developing countries in elevating their scientific knowledge.

Prestige

According to Beatrice, publishing OA articles does wonders for the content producers as well. By making it visible and accessible, the article will reach out to a broader audience pool and in turn greater readership. With this acting as publicity, they will gain prestige.

However, not one scheme is perfect and OA does have its drawbacks. The main issue is sustenance as the publishing costs are paid for by the content producers and they receive zero compensation. One possible solution is CrowdFunding, as stated by Xin Lin where the project cost is divided and funded by interest parties. As the saying goes: Insurmountable for one, but achievable for many.

Another possibility brought up by Maureen is having some content made available to the public and an upgrade has to be bought; where other articles are made accessible only when paid for. Klarissa coined this system as Freemium. The drawback on OA other than publishing costs is the possibility of having the research paper undervalued just because it is free. By revealing some content, viewers will only purchase if they deem it’s an article of substance. Hence, Freemium also brings some worth to the research article in this sense.

Freemium

To conclude, whether Open access content is good or bad is an open debate. Free sharing of information can bring unprecedented good in the aspects of education and healthcare. As long as it is sustained by proper measures as mentioned above, I’m sure more people will be open to the concept.

Word Count: 299

Blogs I commented on:

XinLin

Beatrice

 

Pros and cons of Free Access content

As the world embarks into the age of Digitization, technology is built into every part of our lives; bringing convenience and efficiency. Content is now readily accessible for the masses with the introduction of Open Access resource.

Source

This Piktochart summarizes my main points:

Done by me

Advantages:

Free-for-all (Education)

Albert Einstein

For the first time in human history, people can attain all the education they desire (1) Articles are freely available for anyone who has the interest to read them. Well-written articles are no longer restricted by payment, enabling even undeserved populations to access them. (2) Everyone craves knowledge and when given equal opportunities, people will strive to educate themselves; greatly improving the education standards.

Access for researchers in developing countries (Healthcare)

Poverty is a major cause of ill health and a barrier to necessary healthcare research. (3) Lack of access to subscription-based resources has always plagued researchers in low-income countries. Open access provides the opportunity for them to participate in international research communities where medicines and cures are shared. (4) The exchange of information would alleviate the scientific knowledge gap so better healthcare services can be made available even for developing countries. (5)

Disadvantages:

Publication fees (Sustainability)

Costs

While the end user doesn’t have to pay to read an open access article, someone will still incur the publishing costs. The cost for publishing is steep and it is often the responsibility of the author or sponsors to make payment. On ELSEVIER, the price can range from $500 to $5000 and this makes me question the sustainability of this system. When not adequately compensated, publishers may be discouraged from going open access.

Quality Control

While not for reputable publishers, there are still cases where some open access journals are sloppy work. Journals cover their cost through publication and publishers may be incentivised to publish more, jeopardising the overall quality. Research shows that over 50% of the 304 journals accepted a Deliberately-fabricated article and did not conduct peer reviews. (6)

Quality control

After accessing the pros and cons, the debate is obvious; a trade-off between accessibility and cost. The solution is to have a monitored Paywall which many companies are already adopting. (7) So long as publishers closely monitor the quality and usability of the resources, people will pay for the content they need. (8) As the saying goes: “There is no free meal in the world” and this would balance out the costs against benefits wrought.

(Word count: 399)

References:

1. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED535639
2. http://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/04/07/education-finally-ripe-for-radical-innovation-by-social-entrepreneurs/#f8eb7097a557
3. http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/health/brief/poverty-health
4. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/measuring-the-impact-of-research-access-in-the-developing-world
5. https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1744-8603-10-26
6. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
7. https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/nov/07/paywalls-charging-for-content
8. https://tepsicvedran.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/106/