Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@rossmounce
Created Jan 6, 2020
Embed
What would you like to do?
My email to the ECOLOG-L mailing list
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 22:05:03 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJr+OEyZ6kYp=5vLqsEk6CqmYCSNCOMbQrGqT5rnHZ98Fpqzbg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Why is ESA lobbying against immediate access to federally funded research?
From: Ross Mounce <ross.mounce@gmail.com>
To: ECOLOG-L@community.esa.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b46a71059a29dec3"
--000000000000b46a71059a29dec3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Dear List,
It has come to my attention that the Ecological Society of America is
listed as an official signatory on a December 18th letter [1] sent by the
American Association of Publishers to President Donald J. Trump, lobbying
against immediate access to federally funded research.
Who exactly within the Ecological Society of America authorised the society
to be a signatory to this letter? Who was consulted about this? Was the ESA
membership consulted about this?
I have a feeling that many ESA members would be strongly opposed to the
position of this letter (as am I). I note that a majority of the
organisational signatories to the letter are either publishers such as
Wiley, Elsevier, and Wolters Kluwer, or learned societies that publish with
those three publishers and thus I'm wondering whether the learned societies
themselves have actually been properly consulted about this matter or
whether the publishers (Wiley, Elsevier and Wolters Kluwer) have merely
assumed the support of the societies they help to publish journals for.
Some clarity on this matter from ESA leadership would be welcome.
Kind regards,
Ross
[1]
https://presspage-production-content.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/1508/coalitionletteropposinglowerembargoes12.18.2019-581369.pdf
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment