Jeffrey Beall black listed Hindawi and Versita Open and after “negotiation”, he removed the publishers name from his black list

Jeffrey Beall work as a librarian at Auraria Library, University of Colorado Denver, in Denver, Colorado. He  maintains a list of open access journals and  publishers.
He includes lot of good journals as list of Predatory publishers in his web page. He will write rubbish about the journals for particular period of time then email the publisher for negotiation. If the publisher agrees to pay him, he will remove the publisher from his predatory list. Since the growing and well reputed open access journals is taking the revenue of closed access publishers, he has been doing this scam for a long time and is backed by closed access journals community.
For example he black listed Hindawi  and Versita Open and after “negotiation”, he removed the publishers name from his black list.  This guy publish his “great research”  works  with the help of   his supporters. He had published an article in “XYZ” and it can be accessible in the Internet.
The readers posted comments about his real face and “XYZ’s websites. Since XYZ is a strong backer of him,  removed those comments from its web pages. THE XYZ is a one of the leading closed Access Publisher.
If any one has  Jeffrey Beall scam email, please post it here.
We found also this real story: http://editorjccr.wordpress.com/2012/12/
I was surprised when one of our editors told me that the name of Ashdin Publishing is found in the list of “Beall’s List: Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers” (http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/) and I was surprised because of the following reasons:
  1. The author did not just mention the criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers, but he insisted on mentioning the full names and details of the publishers as well.
  2. Some of these criteria, for determining predatory open-access publishers, can be applied on a huge number of publishers (include some of the large and famous ones), but he did not mention any of them.
  3. Some of the publishers names are removed from this list without saying the reasons for this removal.
After I received the e-mail below, I am not any more surprised. Now, I am sure that the author, irrespective the good reasons he may has for preparing this list, wants to blackmail small publishers to pay him.
I invite all of you to read what people say commenting on his article (http://www.nature.com/news/predatory-publishers-are-corrupting-open-access-1.11385)
Nature is removed and constantly the few negative posts against Beals article.
http://www.nature.com/news/report?article=1.11385&comment=52626

Dr Gillian Dooley (Special Collections Librarian at Flinders University):
Jeffrey Beall’s list is not accurate to believe. There are a lot of personal biases of Jeffrey Beall. Hindawi still uses heavy spam emailing. Versita Open still uses heavy spam emailing. But these two publishers have been removed in Jeffrey Beall’s list recently. There is no reason given by Jeffrey Beall why they were removed. Jeffrey Beall is naive in his analysis. I think some other reliable blog should be created to discuss more fruitfully these issues. His blog has become useless.
Mark Robinson (Acting Editor, Stanford Magazine):
It is a real shame that Jeffrey Beall using Nature.com’s blog to promote his predatory work. Jeffrey Beall just simply confusing us to promote his academic terrorism. His list is fully questionable. His surveying method is not scientific. If he is a real scientist then he must do everything in standard way without any dispute. He wanted to be famous but he does not have the right to destroy any company name or brand without proper allegation. If we support Jeffrey Beall’s work then we are also a part of his criminal activity. Please avoid Jeffrey Beall’s fraudulent and criminal activity.
Now a days anyone can open a blog and start doing things like Jeffrey Beall which is harmful for science and open access journals. Nature should also be very alert from Jeffrey Beall who is now using Nature’s reputation to broadcast his bribery and unethical business model.
Now, I invite all of you in order to take all precautions and not being misled by this blackmailer.
Ashry A. Aly
Director
Ashdin Publishing
http://www.ashdin.com
http://jeffreybeall.wordpress.com/
——– Original Message ——–
SUBJECT: Open Access Publishing
DATE: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 17:39:18 +0000
FROM: Jeffrey Beall <jeffrey.beall@ucdenver.edu>
TO: info@ashdin.com
I maintain list of predatory open access publishers in my blog
http://scholarlyoa.com

Your publisher name is also included in 2012 edition of my predatory open
access publishers list. My recent article in Nature journal can be read
below

http://www.nature.com/news/predatory-publishers-are-corrupting-open-access-1.11385

I can consider re-evaluating your journals for 2013 edition of my list. It
takes a lot my time and resources. The fee for re-evaluation of your
publisher is USD 5000. If your publisher name is not in my list, it will
increase trustworthiness to your journals and it will draw more article
submissions. In case you like re-evaluation for your journals, you can
contact me.

Cordially
Jeffrey Beall
but the best is this:
Jeffrey Beall is on the editorial board of a journal published by Taylor & Francis (T&F).  This is the Journal: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639374.2011.626372#.UurBdfl_vX4
Taylor & Francis (T&F) is a commercial company. Why did Taylor & Francis (T&F) gave an editorial position to Jeffrey Beall? 
Why did Taylor & Francis gave this position to a person without M.Sc. and without Ph.D.? Obviously, because they (T&F) receive something from Jeffrey Beall:  His continuously support from his blog and the extermination of almost all the Open Access Publishers.
T&F is a also a disgusting and nasty Spammer. Taylor and Francis has accepted several fake papers in the past. 
Additionally,  Taylor and Francis officers publish comments in the blog of Jeffrey Beall very frequently.
Taylor and Francis publishes hundreds of academic journals, including STM journals.  Because T&F is a commercial enterprise, Open Access (OA) journal publishers, especially STM publishers, are T&F’s direct competition. 
Jeffrey Beall,, your normalised use of the phrase “predatory publishers” is unwarranted, and serves merely to yoke you (perhaps unfairly) and your flawed arguments.  If you know of particular instances of fraud, then you should make them known, and not use innuendo and generalisations.  The statements made in your blog are laughable.
This competition is small, but is growing, and is taking market share from T&F, and threatens to eat into T&F’s profits.  If T&F suffers financially, one obvious recourse is to cut journals.  Beall’s journal on library cataloguing is at risk.
More directly, STM may be the obvious starting point for these OA publishers.  If they are successful, there is no reason for them not to branch into other areas, including library cataloguing; unless, of course, they hit a wall of prejudice.
Now, it is true that Beall does not attack all OA publishers; such attack would show his bias too openly. It is also true, however, that the only publishers he does attack are Open Access.
And so, we return to the main issue. Academic librarians are trusted by academics around the world.  By speaking out against competitor publishers, and not disclosing his link to T&F, Beall is breaking that trust.

AICIT is not in the List of Jeffrey List. Why? Did they pay? We dare Beall to include AICIT in his list.

AICIT is not in the List of Jeffrey List. Why? Did they pay? We do not know. We cannot prove it as in the case of Hindawi, AIP, Taylor and Francis and so many publishers that sent money that bribed and corrupted Jeffrey Beall.

However, AICIT continuously advertize in their spam emails automatic publication of the same papers (after the conferences) in their Journals.

We sent an email to Jeffrey Beall (from another email account and with a nick name) and we asked him why AICIT  is not in his black list. He replied that “I find that AICIT is excellent”

However AICIT is not fine because:

i) AICIT is a commercial company that uses illegaly and without permission the name of IEEE in its conferences. This is the definition of the academic scam. We know that IEEE does not grant name and logo to so many conferences, we contact IEEE and we were told that they had never granted sponsorship or cosponsorship to IEEE and we send our correspondence with IEEE to Jeffrey Beall (from another email account and with a nick name)

ii) AICIT promises automatic publication of all the papers of its conferences, the same papers and not extended papers, to their journals. We sent the AICIT SPAM to Jeffrey Beall  (from a quite different email account and with a new nick name)

iii) AICIT charges money for publication in its journals and promises rapid review. Isn’t it the definition of Predatory Publisher?

iv) AICIT has a very strange review process. You sent a paper and you got letter of acceptance after 2-3 days without comments, just an account information, in Korea, for money transfer . We show all these documents to Jeffrey Beall. He told us:  OK. They are not perfect, but they are not predatory! I do not want to include them in my list.

v) AICIT web site show as Presidet some Franz I. S. Ko. Franz I. S. Ko is not a Professor at any universityand probably it is a made-up name. He is “President” in AICIT only and has some positions in some strange (maybe dummy) organizations. But no problem for Jeffrey Beall. He founds AICIT perfect!
vi) AICIT had 3 journals that according Beall’s criteria, they must be classified as Full-Predatory:
Check them yourself at http://www.aicit.org/publications.html
* International Journal of Engineering and Industries (IJEI)
* Research Notes in Information Science (RNIS)
* International Journal of Robots, Education and Art (IJREA)
The title of the Journals especially the first is quite general and unacceptable (Engineering and Industries [sic]). Jeffrey Beall, however,  consider Journals of general themes are a proof of a predatory publisher. Then why he refuses to include AICIT in his list?
Also, Jeffrey Beall declares that if you mix unrelated topics in the same journal then you are a predatory publisher. But what is his opinion about the International Journal of Robots, Education and Art (IJREA) of AICIT? AICIT mixed in the same journal Robotics, Education and Art.

vii) AICIT is a really predatory publishing company, but deliberately, intentionally and craftily not in the Beall’s list while we have informed Jeffrey Beall about them several times. AICIT declares: International Association for Information, Culture, Human and Industry Association. See: www.aicit.org How you can have an Association for all these quite different disciplines? This is a Fake Association. A dummy organization, but Jeffrey Beall likes it. Quite Interesting!

viii) AICIT is actually an one-man show: Franz I. S. Ko or of the person that is behind Franz I. S. Ko. Where are the articles of this association? Where are their the documents of the last elections?
And where are the members? How can we become members of AICIT? Members but members not to pay annual subscription, but also to vote and to be voted. That is to participate in the internal things, administration of AICIT.

What do you think Beall. Will you include them in your black list. (A probable answer is: No, because AICIT paid a lot of money to my accounts in Belize and Saint Vicent)

Till now, Jeffrey Beall consider that AICIT is fine and is a legitimate publisher. Draw your own conclusions
We dare Beall to include AICIT in his list otherwise we are entitled to believe that AICIT bribed and corrupted this “predatory” Librarian (=Jeffrey Beall)

Jeffrey Beall include AICIT in your black list. Can you do it???

Thursday, 23 January 2014

Pay and remove your name from Jeffrey Beall’s list.

We were right.
Pay and remove your name from Jeffrey Beall’s list. Commercial Companies pay Jeffrey Beall. They are their gold sponsors and transfer the money to Caribbean Accounts (St.Vicent and Belize).
Clearly and with documents Hindawi, Taylor and Francis, Americal Instititue of Physics (AIP) are the Sponsors of Jeffrey Beall. Read this very serious post. Many people speak about it:
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/12/16/parting-company-with-jeffrey-beall/
Tariff goes with the profit of your company. Beall will tell you. He already asked money from IARIA, SCIRP, HINDAWI, TAYLOR and FRANICS, AIP and several others. There are several places (blogs) and several voices on the web.

IASTED and Jeffrey Beall
We sent an email to Jeffrey Beall and I asked him why he does not have IASTED in his black list. IASTED Conferences have published a lot of fake SCIgen papers (by the way 85 SCIgen Fake (Bogus) papers exist now in IEEE Xplore Read it: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/71/35/55/PDF/0-FakeDetectionSci-Perso.pdf ). We sent  Letters of acceptance (from IASTED) for SCIgen Papers to Jeffrey Beall.
He never replied. He never explained why IASTED isn;t in his black list. On the other hand Jeffrey Beall in an early post was bragging that he was Keynote Speaker in an IASTED Conference! Keynote Speaker without Master and without Ph.D. (profession: Librarian) in a Computer Science conference is very strange. Draw your own conclusion.

IEEE and Jeffrey Beall

Taking into account that IEEE Conferences has published fake SCIgen Papers, it would be reasonable IEEE to be in the black list of Jeffrey Beall. Right? See

Two Fake Papers in IEEE EBISS http://diehimmelistschoen.blogspot.com/ and
http://netdriver.blogspot.com/2010/06/who-others-have-accepted-bogus-texts-in.html
and
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/71/35/55/PDF/0-FakeDetectionSci-Perso.pdf 
and many others (Google: IEEE Fake Conferences or IEEE Bogus Conferences or IEEE SCIgen)
Then why IEEE is not in Beall’s list?

If you know more send an email to predatorylibrarians@gmail.com

Saturday, 18 January 2014

Petre Dini (President of IARIA) writes: “I am also a victim of Jeffrey Beall!”, “This pseudo-scholar Jeffrey Beall is a thug”

We have also found this letter in several reliable blogs and mailing lists:
For Example:
http://mailinglists.scilab.org/I-am-also-victim-of-Jeffrey-Beall-td4027931.html

My name is Petre Dini and I am the President of IARIA, http://www.iaria.org
I am also a victim of Jeffrey Beall!
Actually, this pseudo-scholar Jeffrey Beall is a thug. He uses black lists to create profit. Also he is involved in tax evation and money laundry.
I asked him several times to remove IARIA from his black list and he promised me to re-analyze the site http://www.iaria.org
There is not any real reason to have our institute IARIA in his pseudo-list.
The cost to re-analyze the portal of my organization http://www.iaria.org was 100,000 USD,
Exactly “re-analyze” was the verb that he used in our phone conversation. Why re-analyze? Who is he that analyzes or re-analyzes Academic organizations?
What are his qualifications. I am professor in Electrical Engineering with many publications (in IARIA and outside IARIA). Who is this pseudo-professor – money hungry thug?

Anyway, Jeffrey Beall gave us two accounts in Tax Heaven Countries: One account in a Bank of St. Vincent and another account in Belize.
We do not pay 100,000 USD for IARIA and so IARIA is still now in his list.

I estimate that Hindawi has paid to pseudo-professor Jeffrey Beall something like 1500000 (1 million and half) $

Somebody must report Jeffrey Beall’ activities in American Authorities.

Anybody can kill him.

If somebody kills him, he will absolve the Humanity from this monster.

Thanks

Petre Dini

References:  
[1] http://librarianshipwreck.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/what-does-a-librarian-have-to-do-to-get-sued-for-one-billion-dollars-jeffrey-beall-found-out/
[2] http://mailinglists.scilab.org/I-am-also-victim-of-Jeffrey-Beall-td4027931.html

From: http://jeffreybeall.blogspot.com

Crown witness: Prof. Lu Chen (an Officer in SCIRP) is also another crown witness for Jeffrey Beall.

Tax Evation and money laundry from criminal activities!!! What else!!!

The Librarian collects the money to accounts in Choice Bank in Belize or to Loyal Bank in St. Vincent.

My name is Lu Chen and I work in SCIRP http://www.scirp.org as Web Designer.
Also, I help SCIRP conferences as Secretariat from time to time.
I contact this criminal Jeffrey Beall and I asked him to remove SCIRP from his black list.
Jeffrey Beal asked my Phone Number and I gave it.
Jeffrey Beal call me back and told me that he could help SCIRP, but SCIRP must also help him.
I was astonished when he told me that he could remove SCIRP from his black list provided that we would give him 160,000 USD not by bank account, but in cash in a place in New York.

I told hime that it is very difficult to travel from China (Headquarters of SCIRP) to New York
to deliver him the money and then he told me to deposit them to some accounts in
Choice Bank in Belize or to Loyal Bank in St. Vincent

This is Jeffrey Beall. Several Publishing Houses in his Black list are of low quality indeed.

This is the bait, because the Academic Community must believe that Jeffrey Beall is a reliable person.
What a Scam!

Yes, I agree that many, many Publishers in his Toxic Blog are really of low quality.
But he also includes RESPECTABLE and REPUTABLE Publishers, like SCIRP, IARIA, IDOSI, HINDAWI
and then he asks money from them to take them off.

From us (SCIRP) he asked 160,000 and told us to deposit them to some accounts in
Choice Bank in Belize or to Loyal Bank in St. Vincent

He estimates the profit of each publishing House per year and then he creates a tariff for your Publishing House.
From the small Publishing Companies he does not ask money. They are his bait.
So, suppose that he has 500 Publishing Houses in his black list, he will ask money only from the top 50.

See this PDF: Hindawi was in his black list
http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~jbeall/Beall’s%20List%20of%20Predatory,%20Open-Access%20Publishers%202012.pdf
but Hindawi paid (in my opinion more than 1,000,000 USD to Jeffrey Beall and now Hindawi enjoy to be a Beall’s-List-free company)

I tell you the truth, and only the truth
Jeffrey Beal is a real ROBBER
with a luxurious life style and bank accounts in Caribbean Islands.

Contact the American Authorities now and inform them that this Criminal gathers money
to the Choice Bank in Belize or to Loyal Bank in St. Vincent.
Tax Evation and money laundry from criminal activities!!! What else!!!

Lu Chen

The Librarian added in his “black” list publishers with Journals in ISI. Will he add ISI in his “black” list?

The Librarian (i.e. Jeffrey Beall, the crook, the felon, the criminal of the Academic Community) added in his “black” list publishers with Journals in ISI. Will he add ISI itself in his “black” list?
A Magical Combination: Easy Acceptance and an Authentic Impact Factor

This crook has also added IDOSI Journals (many IDOSI Journals are in ISI) in his black list.
Is this man crazy or a crook or both?

Petre Dini claims that he is also victim of the Librarian  [SOURCE: http://mailinglists.scilab.org/I-am-also-victim-of-Jeffrey-Beall-td4027931.html%5D
My name is Petre Dini and I am the President of IARIA, http://www.iaria.org
I am also victim of Jeffrey Beall
Actually, this pseudo-scholar Jeffrey Beall is a thug. He uses black lists to create profit. Also he is involved in tax evation and money laundry.
I asked him several times to remove IARIA from his black list and he promised me to re-analyze the site http://www.iaria.org
There is not any real reason to have our institute IARIA in his pseudo-list.
The cost to re-analyze the portal of my organization http://www.iaria.org was 100,000 USD,
Exactly “re-analyze” was the verb that he used in our phone conversation. Why re-analyze? Who is he that analyzes or re-analyzes Academic organizations?
What are his qualifications. I am professor in Electrical Engineering with many publications (in IARIA and outside IARIA). Who is this pseudo-professor – money hungry thug?

Anyway, Jeffrey Beall gave us two accounts in Tax Heaven Countries: One account in a Bank of St. Vincent and another account in Belize.
We do not pay 100,000 USD for IARIA and so IARIA is still now in his list.

I estimate that Hindawi has paid to pseudo-professor Jeffrey Beall something like 1500000 (1 million and half) $

Somebody must report Jeffrey Beall’ activities in American Authorities.

Thanks

Petre Dini

From: http://mailinglists.scilab.org/I-am-also-victim-of-Jeffrey-Beall-td4027931.html

A Predatory Librarian Jeffrey Beall: The crook, the felon, the criminal of the Academic Community.

I recently made an inquiry to Jeffrey Beall (the Denver, USA librarian who runs a webpage where he slanders and insults about 500 publishing houses), whether he, Jeffrey Beall himself, has the ability to solve the simple math equation 5x+3 = 0.

Jeffrey Beall replied to my first email, that he has never studied even the simplest form of Math. Meaning that he doesn’t know what “equation” means (he has never even seen equations like 5x+3 = 0, 3x*x + 7x -4 =0 etc), neither does he know what “Derivative” or “Integral” mean.
Jeffrey Beall told me that he has a Bachelor in Spanish and English language. This of course didn’t stop him blacklisting hundreds of houses that publish Math, Physics, Computer Science, Engineering, Economics, Biology, Chemistry, Earth Sciences, Space Science etc Journals. That from a man who isn’t even able to solve the simple equation 5x+3 = 0, and who doesn’t know what Derivative or Integral mean.
Recently, Jeffrey Beall included in his “black list” an old, big Academic Publishing House, with several, historic Journals in Math, Physics, Computer Science, Engineering, Economics (some of which have been indexed in ISI and SCOPUS), and that because, according to Jeffrey Beal, they had copied the… Maxwell Equations from a 2007 article.
Obviously, since Jeffrey Beall doesn’t know how to solve the equation 5x+3 = 0, and since he doesn’t know what Derivative and Integral mean, he has zero knowledge when it comes to Electricity or Physics and has never seen the Maxwell Equations (not even in their most basic form).
As expected from somebody who is entirely clueless regarding even elementary Math and Physics, he considered the Maxwell Equations found in the Journal to be plagiarized… from a 2007 paper.
With a Bachelor in Spanish and English in his CV, Jeffrey Beall passes judgment even to Medicine, Biology, Chemistry etc Journals and articles, while he is fully aware that he’s never attended a University course on which nucleotides make up the DNA molecule, he’s never heard what enzyme, catalysis, proteins etc are, and if one asks him what pH is, he’ll be completely ignorant.
However, in his bizarre blog, this person has declared himself a critic of everyone and everything. He blacklists publishing houses (many of which having journals and conferences indexed in ISI, SCOPUS, Compendex, ACM etc), he includes stand-alone journals in “black lists”, slanders Editors-in-Chief, Authors etc. Of course he does all that selectively, following a certain logic of his, which will be analyzed below.
In a later email that I sent him, I asked him to comment on why he includes a small publishing house in his black list because “they copied Maxwell’s Equations from a 2007 paper” (poor Jeffrey Beall doesn’t know that Maxwell’s Equations are taught in Universities’ first year elementary physics), while at the same time he excludes IEEE, who have over 85 SCIgen machine-generated fake conference papers published and indexed.
(See: A 2013 scientometrics paper demonstrated that at least 85 SCIgen machine-generated papers have been published by IEEE. The Paper has been published in Springer Verlag:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-012-0781-
Download the full paper from:
He also didn’t respond to the question why he didn’t include Elsevier in his black list, who were revealed to have been publishing 6 Medical Journals between 2000 and 2005 with fake articles and studies, that were funded by pharmaceutical companies, in order to scientifically prove that their products were superior to their competitors’. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier
or
In a third email I asked him where his moral and academic responsibility stands, since if due to him including some publishing houses in black lists, those houses reduce or cease their activity (due to his immoral slandering), hundreds of jobs will be lost and families will end up in the street. Naturally, despite my repeated emails, Jeffrey Beall never replied.
There are also rumors on the internet that some publishing houses, like Hindawi and Elsevier, pay Jeffrey Beall on a yearly basis in order not to be included in his black list. This looks like heavy taxing that the publisher is asked to pay annually to Jeffrey Beall, and, as we’ll see below, part of this tax ends up in the Denver University funds.
Actually, Hindawi was in Jeffrey Beall’s black list a year ago. Then, after negotiations, Jeffrey Beall placed them in a watching list (i.e. an “under observation” list), and eventually completely removed them.
Just like Jeffrey Beall himself mentioned in his blog, Hindawi’s people visited him in Denver and offered him “explanations”. After that, Jeffrey Beall gradually removed Hindawi from his black list.
Why, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, did you agree to meet with Hindawi’s representatives in your office in Denver, when Hindawi was black listed? What did you talk about, Mr. Jeffrey Beall? Hindawi, as mentioned on their website, has an annual turnover of $6 million.
Couldn’t they use part of that money to pay off Jeffrey Beall?
Furthermore, in his blog, Jeffrey Beall has posted a photo of Hindawi’s headquarters, which he calls “House of Spam”. So, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, why isn’t Hindawi in your black list, when among your fundamental black listing reasons, like you mention in your blog, is spam?
Having read all that, you can draw your own conclusions on who Jeffrey Beall is and what his real motives behind his publishing house and scientific organization black listing blog are. Houses and Organizations that Jeffrey Beall calls “Predatory Publishers”.
Maybe it’s time to talk about Predatory Librarians, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. About librarians who target Open Access Journals, especially because the open, online PDF policy deprives librarians (like Jeffrey Beall) from the possibility of receiving kickbacks from publishing houses.
To those who are not aware, it is known that several publishing houses paid- and pay-off librarians (like Jeffrey Beall), in order to get their libraries to subscribe to those houses.
Meaning that, in order for a certain University, Research Center, Company to buy some books or subscribe to some journals, it is common knowledge that librarians receive money under the table from the respective publishing houses. It is therefore natural and understandable for this kind of librarians (Jeffrey Beall, for instance) to fight Open Access Journals and Open Access Publishing Houses, since they
a) lose their kickbacks,
b) lose their power and influence in the library, as well as the University.
I’ve saved all my email exchange with Jeffrey Beall, along with their headers/source code, and I will soon upload them to various websites. I need everyone’s help though, by sending me emails (to the email address found at the bottom) and exchanging information on Jeffrey Beall’s scandalous behavior.
And one last question to Jeffrey Beall: How can a librarian WITHOUT a Ph.D. be an Assistant Professor at the University of Denver, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?
Could it be that Jeffrey Beall bribed older professors, using the abundance of money that he is said to possess?
Could it be that Jeffrey Beall threatened that if they don’t vote for him, he’ll include all journals where they have papers published in his black list, and slander them on the internet?
Or is it that they were so much impressed by his research? Actually, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, what is your scientific research? Your scientific research as a “real scientist” that is, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. What publications do you have, besides slandering, insulting and discredit hundreds of scientific organizations and publishing houses? What do you teach at the University of Denver Mr. Jeffrey Beall?
Is there really any course (real scientific course) that you can teach, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, besides calling publishing houses and scientific organizations “predatory”?
 It doesn’t look like it, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. No matter how hard we looked, we didn’t find any courses taught by you at the University of Denver.
Neither on your personal webpage, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, nor on your money-making blog, nor even on the University of Denver website is there any mention about courses taught by you.
So, since you do absolutely no scientific research, and you don’t even teach pre-graduate or post-graduate students, what is your role at the University of Denver, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?
Does the University of Denver pay you a salary, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, or do you pay the University to let you bear the title of Assistant Professor?
A title that you really do not deserve, as you have no Ph.D., no actual research work and do no teaching whatsoever. It is a shame for the University of Denver to have professors like you, Jeffrey Beall.
Or is running a blog that slanders everyone and everything considered scientific research?
It most certainly is not, Mr. Jeffrey Beall.
Could it be, however, an applied money-making project for you and your university, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?
 (By the way, why should a small publishing house from some place in India, which cannot attract papers, nor editorial board members, from western universities, be in your black list Mr. Jeffrey Beall? In this case, you should also black list all non-US and non-European universities. Of course there exist first-rate universities, like Harvard, MIT, Berkeley, Cambridge. Should all other universities be in a black list? Is this your logic “Professor” Beall? Furthermore, you condemn any new publishing house, as it is natural for them to not have papers and not be indexed as soon as they launch, but has to deal with you, who, like a vulture, immediately includes them in your black list for those reasons.)
I would greatly appreciate your response, Mr. Jeffrey Beal. And I would also appreciate feedback from anyone who agrees with me.
My aim is to create a network of true scientists and expose “Professor”, “Academic Teacher” and, above all, “Researcher” Jeffrey Beall (this science jack-of-all-trades, who doesn’t know a first-degree algebraic equation, derivatives, integrals, elementary Physics and Chemistry laws, etc)
Thank you

September 2013

Friday, 10 January 2014

Is AIP (American Institute of Physics) a Predatory Publisher?

Is AIP (American Institute of Physics) a Predatory Publisher? See the following link: In the Journal of Applied Physics published by  AIP (American Institute of Physics) there is an unusual number of self-citations. Is this journal Predatory? Is AIP (American Institute of Physics) a Predatory Publisher?

We have the Proof that AIP (American Institute of Physics)  is a reall Predatory Publisher. Read this:
http://www.academia.edu/934257/How_to_increase_your_papers_citations_and_h_index_in_5_simple_steps

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

List of Prof. Michel GEVERS with the names of 5585 Academicians after an on-line petition against IEEE and against IEEE racism. Michel GEVERS removed his list when IEEE elevated him to IEEE Fellow grade. ΙΕΕΕ bribed and corrupted Prof. Michel Gevers in this way.

IEEE Bribery and IEEE Racism.

We hope you know the List of Prof. Michel GEVERS with the names of 5585 Academicians after an on-line petition against IEEE and against IEEE racism.
Michel GEVERS removed his list when IEEE elevated him to IEEE Fellow grade.
ΙΕΕΕ bribed and corrupted Prof. Michel Gevers in this way. Read more: jeffreybeall.blogspot.gr/2009/01/list-of-academicians-that-protest.html

Wednesday, 23 October 2013

For 2 months now, Prof. Vincenzo Piuri has been pestering us with his spam emails to be voted President of IEEE.

He also didn’t respond to the question why he didn’t include Elsevier in his black list, who were revealed to have been publishing 6 Medical Journals between 2000 and 2005 with fake articles and studies, that were funded by pharmaceutical companies, in order to scientifically prove that their products were superior to their competitors’. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier
or
http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2009/05/elsevier-confirms-6-fake-journals-more.html

In a third email I asked him where his moral and academic responsibility stands, since if due to him including some publishing houses in black lists, those houses reduce or cease their activity (due to his immoral slandering), hundreds of jobs will be lost and families will end up in the street. Naturally, despite my repeated emails, Jeffrey Beall never replied.

There are also rumors on the internet that some publishing houses, like Hindawi and Elsevier, pay Jeffrey Beall on a yearly basis in order not to be included in his black list. This looks like heavy taxing that the publisher is asked to pay annually to Jeffrey Beall, and, as we’ll see below, part of this tax ends up in the Denver University funds.

Actually, Hindawi was in Jeffrey Beall’s black list a year ago. Then, after negotiations, Jeffrey Beall placed them in a watching list (i.e. an “under observation” list), and eventually completely removed them.

Just like Jeffrey Beall himself mentioned in his blog, Hindawi’s people visited him in Denver and offered him “explanations”. After that, Jeffrey Beall gradually removed Hindawi from his black list.
Why, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, did you agree to meet with Hindawi’s representatives in your office in Denver, when Hindawi was black listed? What did you talk about, Mr. Jeffrey Beall? Hindawi, as mentioned on their website, has an annual turnover of $6 million.

Couldn’t they use part of that money to pay off Jeffrey Beall?

Furthermore, in his blog, Jeffrey Beall has posted a photo of Hindawi’s headquarters, which he calls “House of Spam”. So, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, why isn’t Hindawi in your black list, when among your fundamental black listing reasons, like you mention in your blog, is spam?

Having read all that, you can draw your own conclusions on who Jeffrey Beall is and what his real motives behind his publishing house and scientific organization black listing blog are. Houses and Organizations that Jeffrey Beall calls “Predatory Publishers”.

Maybe it’s time to talk about Predatory Librarians, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. About librarians who target Open Access Journals, especially because the open, online PDF policy deprives librarians (like Jeffrey Beall) from the possibility of receiving kickbacks from publishing houses.

To those who are not aware, it is known that several publishing houses paid- and pay-off librarians (like Jeffrey Beall), in order to get their libraries to subscribe to those houses.

Meaning that, in order for a certain University, Research Center, Company to buy some books or subscribe to some journals, it is common knowledge that librarians receive money under the table from the respective publishing houses. It is therefore natural and understandable for this kind of librarians (Jeffrey Beall, for instance) to fight Open Access Journals and Open Access Publishing Houses, since they
a) lose their kickbacks,
b) lose their power and influence in the library, as well as the University.

I’ve saved all my email exchange with Jeffrey Beall, along with their headers/source code, and I will soon upload them to various websites. I need everyone’s help though, by sending me emails (to the email address found at the bottom) and exchanging information on Jeffrey Beall’s scandalous behavior.

And one last question to Jeffrey Beall: How can a librarian WITHOUT a Ph.D. be an Assistant Professor at the University of Denver, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?

Could it be that Jeffrey Beall bribed older professors, using the abundance of money that he is said to possess?

Could it be that Jeffrey Beall threatened that if they don’t vote for him, he’ll include all journals where they have papers published in his black list, and slander them on the internet?

Or is it that they were so much impressed by his research? Actually, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, what is your scientific research? Your scientific research as a “real scientist” that is, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. What publications do you have, besides slandering, insulting and discredit hundreds of scientific organizations and publishing houses? What do you teach at the University of Denver Mr. Jeffrey Beall?

Is there really any course (real scientific course) that you can teach, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, besides calling publishing houses and scientific organizations “predatory”?

It doesn’t look like it, Mr. Jeffrey Beall. No matter how hard we looked, we didn’t find any courses taught by you at the University of Denver.

Neither on your personal webpage, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, nor on your money-making blog, nor even on the University of Denver website is there any mention about courses taught by you.

So, since you do absolutely no scientific research, and you don’t even teach pre-graduate or post-graduate students, what is your role at the University of Denver, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?

Does the University of Denver pay you a salary, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, or do you pay the University to let you bear the title of Assistant Professor?

A title that you really do not deserve, as you have no Ph.D., no actual research work and do no teaching whatsoever. It is a shame for the University of Denver to have professors like you, Jeffrey Beall.

Or is running a blog that slanders everyone and everything considered scientific research?

It most certainly is not, Mr. Jeffrey Beall.

Could it be, however, an applied money-making project for you and your university, Mr. Jeffrey Beall?

(By the way, why should a small publishing house from some place in India, which cannot attract papers, nor editorial board members, from western universities, be in your black list Mr. Jeffrey Beall? In this case, you should also black list all non-US and non-European universities. Of course there exist first-rate universities, like Harvard, MIT, Berkeley, Cambridge. Should all other universities be in a black list? Is this your logic “Professor” Beall? Furthermore, you condemn any new publishing house, as it is natural for them to not have papers and not be indexed as soon as they launch, but has to deal with you, who, like a vulture, immediately includes them in your black list for those reasons.)

I would greatly appreciate your response, Mr. Jeffrey Beal. And I would also appreciate feedback from anyone who agrees with me.

My aim is to create a network of true scientists and expose “Professor”, “Academic Teacher” and, above all, “Researcher” Jeffrey Beall (this science jack-of-all-trades, who doesn’t know a first-degree algebraic equation, derivatives, integrals, elementary Physics and Chemistry laws, etc)
Thank you

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

Fake IEEE Conferences

We found by Google 2 more collections of IEEE Fake, Predatory, Bogus Conferences:

http://iacsit.org/pub09.htm

http://iacsit.org/pub08.htm

Draw your own conclusions.

b)  Another excellent report:  Do the IEEE Fellows organize Fake Conferences? Fake Conference is inviting scholars to send the rejected papers from the other conferences.
If an IEEE Fellow organizes Fake and Bogus conferences, IEEE must retract the IEEE Fellowship from him,
otherwise IEEE is Fake and Bogus itself. (We know that is.)

Friday, 4 October 2013

New Junk IEEE Conference. New Fake IEEE Conference. Why aren”t these conferences in Jeffrey Beall’ list?

Searching by google for new Junk IEEE Conferences, Fake IEEE Conferences we found this interesting case: AMERICAN COUNCIL OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION, IEEE Sponsored Conference.
http://www.americancse.org/events/csci2014/publication
The conference is listesd in IEEE Official Site as IEEE Conference.

Send email to IEEE informing them about this fake conference: cpspublishing@computer.org

What’s wrong with this conference?
a) The main problem for this conference is that this is supposed to organized by … “AMERICAN COUNCIL OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION”.
There is not any AMERICAN COUNCIL OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION and obviously this is a counterfeit, spurious institute, a money making machine for IEEE Officers. This is a made up, mock institute.

b) This bogus IEEE Conference is without Chairman, without International Program committee and of course we do not know who is the real organizer, since the … “AMERICAN COUNCIL OF SCIENCE AND EDUCATION” is a scam.

We recommend to inform your colleagues about this IEEE Fraud and about this IEEE mock conference. Do not serve in the committee of this conference, if they invite you later. We also recommend against publications to this bogus anti-academic pseudoconference.

Send email to IEEE informing them about this fake conference: cpspublishing@computer.org

Advertisements

(Predatory Blogger) Scholarly Open Access Critical Analysis of Jeffrey Beall’s Blog – Open Access Publishing

 

From: http://www.scholarlyoa.net/index.htm

We are maintaining Beall’s activities in order to expose his conspiracy against Open Access Journals.
Beall’s predatory and corrupt practices and scholarly comments about predatory blogger listed here. We frequently update Beall’s List.

We have added Jeffrey Beall to our list as a potential, possible, probable, predatory Blogger.
Appeals: Beall and his bloggers may appeal inclusion on this list.

If Beall or his bloggers believe that Beall should not be included on the list, as a “predatory blogger” please send an email to the, Friends of Open Access, at openaccess@scholarlyoa.net

In the email, please state the reasons why Beall or you believe, Beall should not be included. The email will be forwarded to a four-member advisory board. The board will then review the Beall’s blog-website and conduct on the Beall’s operations. The board will then advise the Friends of Open Access to retain or remove the listing. Appeals are limited to one every 60 days.

Backlash over journals blacklisting

Beall acting as a mouthpiece

Motion to repudiate Beall’s attack on Open access journals
World stand against Beall’s conspiracy and predatory practices against Open access Journals
Jeffrey Beall: A Predatory blogger and his blacklist

Beall’s goes bananas, then predatory practice exposed

Another laugher: Beall academic Joker and Colorado Clown

Beall’s critiques of open access are not factual
Beall’s black listing; unqualified service does not help researchers

Anti-OA and the Rhetoric of Reaction

Beall has Gone Bananas: Beall has essentially discredited himself

Credibility of Beall’s List : Writes half-truths, errors and downright nonsense

Beall Doubles Down

Beall’s list was controversial from the start
Walt Crawford on Beall’s list

Beall’s Predatory Business at the expenses of Publishers: Beall fails to acknowledge that open peer review
Beall’s position as tenuous: Imperfect English or a predominantly non-Western editorial board does not make a journal predatory

Beall not served as an editor in any reputable journal but criticize all journal at his vicinity

Jeffrey Beall is blackmailing small Open Access publishers through blogs

Beall is an academic criminal and terrorist
Beall is absolutely insane
Predatory librarian Beall has no credibility

Beall negotiated the ransom with open access publisher to remove from hit list for 160,000 USD, not by bank account, but in cash in a place in New York. Predatory blogger Beall, collects the money to accounts in Choice Bank in Belize or to Loyal Bank in St. Vincent
Writing a blog that slanders everyone not considered as scientific research
Pseudo-scholar Jeffrey Beall is a thug. Demanded ransom US$ 100,000 to re-analyze open access publisher

USD 5000 is enough to remove your publisher’s name from Beall’s list
Unethical bribery business model

Scholarlyoa.com fake website run by Jeffrey Beall

Beall has no formal training in doing self-guided research

People have started to turn away from Beall.
List should be ignored

Beall’s claims rejected by Open Access Scholarly publisher Association (OASPA)
Predatory blogger exposed

Beall who has no PhD himself, published scholarly comments on a “Biophysics review”
Beall has only Bachelor degree in “Spanish” Language

Does the University of Denver pay you a salary, Mr. Jeffrey Beall, or do you pay the University to let you bear the title of Assistant Professor?

Jeffrey Beall is an impostor and academic criminal – Dr. Clement

The Wheels Come Off the Beall express…….Beall’s first sentence may qualify as “not even wrong”
Beall’s List, is really an assault

Beall is a academic terrorist

Jeffrey Beall’s list is not accurate to believe

The case for treating Beall as a questionable source : Beall acting as prosecutor, judge and jury
Sad case of Jeffrey Beall : He’s the one man authority on predatory—but only predatory OA—publishing

Another failed attempt to collect ransom: Beall goes beyond ridiculous

Canadian Agency slammed: Beall’s another Extortion attempt failed

Beall’s Litter
Beall’s List of Howlers: Cameo Responds
Bachelor of Arts in Spanish: Beall’s attempt to monitor peer review process for science and technology journals is ridiculous and laughable

A Predatory Librarian Jeffrey Beall: The crook, the felon, the criminal of the Academic Community

Beall’s attempt at being a Godfather of Open Access is ridiculous
Beall’s analysis is problematic – Nature
Beall’s extortion attempts exposed

Open Access Publishing – USD 5000 is enough to remove your publisher’s name from Beall’s list

I was surprised when one of our editors told me that the name of Ashdin Publishing is found in the list of “Beall’s List: Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers” (http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/) and I was surprised because of the following reasons:

  1. The author did not just mention the criteria for determining predatory open-access publishers, but he insisted on mentioning the full names and details of the publishers as well.
  2. Some of these criteria, for determining predatory open-access publishers, can be applied on a huge number of publishers (include some of the large and famous ones), but he did not mention any of them.
  3. Some of the publishers names are removed from this list without saying the reasons for this removal.

After I received the e-mail below, I am not any more surprised. Now, I am sure that the author, irrespective the good reasons he may has for preparing this list, wants to blackmail small publishers to pay him.

I invite all of you to read what people say commenting on his article (http://www.nature.com/news/predatory-publishers-are-corrupting-open-access-1.11385)
Nature is removed and constantly the few negative posts against Beals article.
http://www.nature.com/news/report?article=1.11385&comment=52626Dr Gillian Dooley (Special Collections Librarian at Flinders University):

Jeffrey Beall’s list is not accurate to believe. There are a lot of personal biases of Jeffrey Beall. Hindawi still uses heavy spam emailing. Versita Open still uses heavy spam emailing. But these two publishers have been removed in Jeffrey Beall’s list recently. There is no reason given by Jeffrey Beall why they were removed. Jeffrey Beall is naive in his analysis. I think some other reliable blog should be created to discuss more fruitfully these issues. His blog has become useless.

Mark Robinson (Acting Editor, Stanford Magazine):

It is a real shame that Jeffrey Beall using Nature.com’s blog to promote his predatory work. Jeffrey Beall just simply confusing us to promote his academic terrorism. His list is fully questionable. His surveying method is not scientific. If he is a real scientist then he must do everything in standard way without any dispute. He wanted to be famous but he does not have the right to destroy any company name or brand without proper allegation. If we support Jeffrey Beall’s work then we are also a part of his criminal activity. Please avoid Jeffrey Beall’s fraudulent and criminal activity.

Now a days anyone can open a blog and start doing things like Jeffrey Beall which is harmful for science and open access journals. Nature should also be very alert from Jeffrey Beall who is now using Nature’s reputation to broadcast his bribery and unethical business model.

Now, I invite all of you in order to take all precautions and not being misled by this blackmailer.

Ashry A. Aly
Director
Ashdin Publishing
http://www.ashdin.com

——– Original Message ——–

SUBJECT: Open Access Publishing
DATE: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 17:39:18 +0000
FROM: Jeffrey Beall <jeffrey.beall@ucdenver.edu>
TO: info@ashdin.com
I maintain list of predatory open access publishers in my blog
http://scholarlyoa.com

Your publisher name is also included in 2012 edition of my predatory open
access publishers list. My recent article in Nature journal can be read
below

http://www.nature.com/news/predatory-publishers-are-corrupting-open-access-1.11385

I can consider re-evaluating your journals for 2013 edition of my list. It
takes a lot my time and resources. The fee for re-evaluation of your
publisher is USD 5000. If your publisher name is not in my list, it will
increase trustworthiness to your journals and it will draw more article
submissions. In case you like re-evaluation for your journals, you can
contact me.

Cordially
Jeffrey Beall

Source: https://editorjccr.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/open-access-publishing-usd-5000-is-enough-to-remove-your-publishers-name-from-bealls-list/

Beyond Beall’s List Better understanding predatory publishers

  1. Monica Berger and
  2. Jill Cirasella

Author Affiliations


  1. Monica Berger is electronic resources and technical services librarian at New York City College of Technology-CUNY, email:mberger@citytech.cuny.edu

  2. Jill Cirasella is associate librarian for public services and scholarly communication at The Graduate Center, CUNY, email:jcirasella@gc.cuny.edu

If you have even a fleeting interest in the evolving landscape of scholarly communication, you’ve probably heard of predatory open access (OA) journals. These are OA journals that exist for the sole purpose of profit, not the dissemination of high-quality research findings and furtherance of knowledge. These predators generate profits by charging author fees, also known as article processing charges (APCs), that far exceed the cost of running their low-quality, fly-by-night operations.

Charging a fee is not itself a marker of a predatory publisher: many reputable OA journals use APCs to cover costs, especially in fields where research is often funded by grants. (Many subscription-based journals also charge authors fees, sometimes per page or illustration.) However, predatory journals are primarily fee-collecting operations—they exist for that purpose and only incidentally publish articles, generally without rigorous peer review, despite claims to the contrary.

Of course, low-quality publishing is not new. There have long been opportunistic publishers (e.g., vanity presses and sellers of public domain content) and deceptive publishing practices (e.g., yellow journalism and advertisements formatted to look like articles).

It is also not unique to OA journals. There are many mediocre subscription-based journals, and even respected subscription-based journals have accepted deeply problematic submissions (e.g., Andrew Wakefield et al.’s article linking autism to vaccines in The Lancet1 and Alan Sokal’s nonsense article in Social Text).2

Although predatory publishers predate OA, their recent explosion was expedited by the emergence and success of fee-charging OA journals. No matter how strong our urge to support and defend OA, librarians cannot deny the profusion of predators in the OA arena; John Bohannon’s recent “sting” made abundantly clear (despite methodological flaws) that there are many bad actors.3 Rather, we should seek to understand their methods, track their evolution, and communicate their characteristics to our patrons.

Blacklists, whitelists, and other defenses against predatory publishers

The highest-profile watchdog of predatory publishers is Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado-Denver, who curates a blacklist of “potential, possible, or probable” predatory OA publishers and journals.4 Beall’s list has become a go-to tool and has even been featured in The New York Times,5 but it is not the final word on predatory publishing, partially because Beall himself has a complicated, and not entirely supportive, attitude toward OA in general.

Without a doubt, Beall has amassed considerable knowledge and greatly increased awareness of predatory publishing. He is recognized as a leading expert and has gone largely unchallenged, probably both because nonexperts are eager for blacklists that seemingly obviate the need for individual analysis of publishers and journals, and because little empirical research has been done on the phenomenon of predatory publishing. However, in 2014, Walt Crawford took Beall to task in an article called “Ethics and Access 1: The Sad Case of Jeffrey Beall.”6

Crawford criticizes Beall for not contextualizing predatory or low-quality publishing as a phenomenon that predates OA and is not exclusive to OA journals. He also points out that Beall favors toll-access publishers, specifically Elsevier, praising its “consistent high quality.”7 However, a simple Google search for “fake Elsevier journals” reveals Beall’s position as tenuous. Furthermore, Beall conflates OA journals with “author pays” journals, and reveals his skepticism, if not hostility, about OA.8

Politics aside, Beall’s laser-like focus on predatory publishers may prevent him from having a broader perspective on scholarly communication. Case in point: Beall has blithely declared the “serials crisis” to be over,9 but those of us who manage resources beg to differ.

Another concerning aspect of Beall’s work is his evaluation of OA publishers from less economically developed countries. Crawford, Karen Coyle, and Jill Emery have all noted Beall’s bias against these publishers.10,11,12 Imperfect English or a predominantly non-Western editorial board does not make a journal predatory. An interesting example is Hindawi, an Egyptian publisher once considered predatory that improved its practices and standards over time. If we accept that there is a continuum from devious and duplicitous to simply low-quality and amateurish, then it is likely, as Crawford believes, that some of the publishers on Beall’s list are not actually predatory.13

Although Beall’s contributions are arguably compromised by his attitudes about OA, the criteria he uses for his list are an excellent starting point for thinking about the hallmarks of predatory publishers and journals.14 He encourages thorough analysis, including scrutiny of editorial boards and business practices. Some of his red flags provide a lot of “bang for your buck” in that they are both easy to spot and likely to indicate a predatory operation. These include editors or editorial board members with no or fake academic affiliations, lack of clarity about fees, publisher names and journal titles with geographic terms that have no connection to the publisher’s physical location or journal’s geographic scope, bogus impact factor claims and invented metrics, and false claims about where the journal is indexed.

Beall also lists common practices indicative of low-quality but not necessarily predatory journals. He is rightfully wary of journals that solicit manuscripts by spamming researchers, as established publishers generally do not approach scholars, as well as publishers or editors with email addresses from Gmail, Yahoo, etc. Also, he wisely warns researchers away from journals with bizarrely broad or disjointed scopes and journals that boast extremely rapid publication, which usually suggests no or only cursory peer review.

Given the fuzziness between low-quality and predatory publishers, whitelisting, or listing publishers and journals that have been vetted and verified as satisfying certain standards, may be a better solution than blacklisting. The central player in the whitelisting movement is the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

In response to the Bohannon sting, DOAJ removed 114 journals and revamped its criteria for inclusion.15 Journals accepted into DOAJ after March 2014 under the stricter rules are marked with a green tick symbol, and DOAJ has announced that it will require the remaining 99% of its listed journals to reapply for acceptance.

At the basic level, a journal must be chiefly scholarly; make the content immediately available (i.e., no embargoes); provide quality control through an editor, editorial board, and peer review; have a registered International Standard Serial Number (ISSN); and exercise transparency about APCs. Journals that meet additional requirements, such as providing external archiving and creating persistent links, are recognized with the DOAJ Seal. DOAJ receives an assist from the ISSN Centre, which in 2014 added language reserving the right to deny ISSNs to publishers that provide misleading information.16

An organization that whitelists publishers by accepting them as members is the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). Members must apply and pledge to adhere to a code of conduct that disallows any form of predatory be-havior.17 OASPA has made errors in vetting applicants, though: it admitted some publishers that it later had to reject (e.g., Dove Medical Press).

Of course, no blacklist or whitelist can substitute for head-on investigation of a journal. Open Access Journal Quality Indicators, a rubric by Sarah Beaubien and Max Eckard featuring both positive and negative journal characteristics, can help researchers perform such evaluation.18 Furthermore, any tool or practice that gives researchers more information is a boon. For example, altmetrics provide a broad picture of an article’s impact (not necessarily correlated to its quality), and open peer review—i.e., any form of peer review where the reviewer’s identity is not hidden—increases transparency and allows journals to demonstrate their standards.19

The role of librarians

As librarians, we need to understand the hallmarks and methods of predatory publishers for several reasons. Most obviously, we must help researchers avoid becoming prey and help readers recognize low-quality journals. In addition, we need to counteract the misconceptions and alarmism that stymie the acceptance of OA.

For example, many researchers conflate journal quality with publication model or business model, and librarians can help untangle those concepts. To do so, we must arm ourselves with clear, convincing explanations that quality and reputation are independent of openness, that OA journals do not necessarily charge fees, and that fees do not necessarily imply predatoriness. We should be ready with examples of high-quality and well-respected OA journals, as well as reassuring facts about fees (e.g., as of January 2015, 63% of journals listed in DOAJ have no fees) and efforts to marginalize predatory publishers.

Furthermore, we need to make sure that researchers understand that OA can be achieved not only through OA journals but also through self-archiving in repositories. Confusion on this point is still rampant, and too many researchers write off OA entirely because they’ve encountered suspect OA journals.

Clarifying the two approaches can reengage these researchers with the prospect of opening scholarly literature. Of course, it is always strategic to explain the benefits of OA in general, including increased readership and citations.

In other words, we need to be able to describe the beast, its implications, and its limitations—neither understating nor overstating its size and danger. By informing ourselves and our patrons, we not only counter confusion about OA journal publishing but also help starve predators and therefore contribute to the future of scholarly communication.

More broadly, librarians play an important role as participants in blacklisting, whitelisting, and other projects endeavoring to deter predatory publishers and promote best practices. We are key stakeholders in scholarly and professional conversations reimagining various aspects of scholarly communication.

Footnotes

  • Contact series editors Zach Coble, digital scholarship specialist at New York University, and Adrian Ho, director of digital scholarship at the University of Kentucky Libraries, at crlnscholcomm@gmail.com with article ideas

Notes

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
  19. 19.

 

A LOOK AT OPEN ACCESS PUBLICATION AND A SPECIFIC CRITIQUE OF BEALL’S LIST OF “SO CALLED” PREDATORY JOURNALS

Martin S. Fiebert, Ph.D.Department of PsychologyCalifornia State University, Long BeachAbstractThe Internet has changed all aspects of communications,including the publication of academic research. Currentlyapproximately 10,000 open access (OA) journals exist in manydisciplines. Although OA provides a rapid turn-aroundpublication time and reaches a wide readership, somecontroversy has arisen. Questions include fees that OA journals charge for publication and their “peer review” practices.
Chiefamong OA critics is Jeffrey Beall [1] who has compiled a list of9,219 open access journals that he terms “preda tory .” This paper questions Beall’s approach , examines some of the issuesin OA publication, and offers evaluation of OA journals.
Keywords: Library Science, Open Access journals, Beall’s list, peer-review.
Read the full article: