As a university student and digital native, the dyad of open access online triggers two reactions: complete frustration when I’m faced with the ‘access denied’ screen or taking my access for granted. It’s the notion of free, instant online materials available to all. The issue of open access can relate to any online material – from an academic journal to those Facebook pictures you secretly stalk – but online journals and media spark the greatest debate. Open access affects every internet user, even if they are unaware of it. Below are some the advantages and disadvantages of open access in order for you to create your own informed opinion.
There is currently an ‘explosion of interest in the academic and publishing communities’ about the promise – and perils – of open access journals (Antelman, 2004). The absurd amounts that some journals charge for access is undermining the essence of science and suppressing discovery and the spreading of knowledge.
Shockey and Eisen (2012) outline the advantages free access articles could present to researchers. The more reachable an article is, the more the author’s work will be read and consequently, the more their ideas can develop and grow. This recycling of material increases the prevalence and popularity of the creator’s work through citation. Additionally, research also becomes freely available to researchers in low income countries, where the access costs may have been obstacle previously to expensive to beat.
- A screenshot from Shockey and Eisen’s (2012) YouTube video
On the other hand, there are some potential drawbacks to freely available academic journals. In order to generate revenues lost from free access, journals may be inclined to publish more articles creating a potential negative effect on quality. Similarly, publishers may begin to hike up publication fees at the expense of the author. Somehow this lost revenue must be covered, but simply shifting the cost liability doesn’t seem fair. It’s also very important to remember that such a proposed free article infrastructure has yet to be tested, so its sustainability is still a very grey area, with no proposed solution to the potential misuse of material (Geib, 2013).
It is predicted that the ‘free for all’ online culture (opitimised by sites like YouTube, Wikipedia and Twitter) that we have come to know and love may end in coming years, with an astounding 90% of online content predicted to be veiled behind paywalls in the next three years. Media managers are starting to comprehend the impact of switching to paid content for websites and apps as digitisation grows.This will incur huge costs to everyday internet users whilst removing the free flow of information and communication. Thus far, few companies have made the leap of faith.
I firmly believe that free access to online materials should be preserved and expanded. I think that education and the easy access and sharing of information is largest benefit that the internet offers, so it would be shameful if this underpinning fundamental were to become more capitalised and unreachable to a large proportion of users.
‘Our goal with open access was getting technology into the hands of undeserved populations around the world to improve education, health care and economic development.’ Dunne 2013
Evie Bool 
Hi Evie, you highlighted the benefits and drawbacks of open access with clarity. One important point you made earlier on is that open access isn’t just about scientific journals etc, but also private content we ourselves put out there. Hence, I think it’s become increasingly important that we know our rights as consumers and producers of information/content.
I agree with the notion that information should be freely available for access, especially so those in developing countries or from lower socioeconomic backgrounds still have deserved access to information. The risk of lower quality information or hoax papers spreading has been declining thanks to platforms like the Directory of Open Access and PubMed. If economic development and increased education is to be achieved then governments ideally should focus their attention on open, affordable (preferably free) access to information and not behind paywalls. There’s nothing more frustrating than being denied access to a full research paper of interest, and I think maybe only writer’s who received no prior government funding should be permitted to charge for subscription.. I was wondering if you had any of your own ideas on how this should be implemented?
Hi Joy!
Thanks for drawing my attention to platforms like the Directory of Open Access and PubMed. I was previously unaware of their existence!
I totally agree that those who do not receive government funding should be entitled to subscription charges. We have to appreciate that publishing is not free. However, after doing a bit of research it seems that most academic articles receive funding, be this government-funded, privately funded or from a granting agency. When the research is being funded by a third party, I think a model needs to be worked on where funded research is free to read and shared more freely. Paywalls should only exist for personally funded research.
Hi Evie,
I’m typing against the clock here as I totally forgot about writing these questions! Your arguments about a decrease in journal subscription prices possibly leading to a drop in quality of articles or – at the very least – a quantity over quality approach from publishers is interesting and probably bang on the money.
However, do you think it is possible that we start seeing journals (either hard copies or digital) with more advertising like free to use websites such as Facebook in order to pay for the publishing? Would this be a feasible and sustainable method?
Hi Jake,
Thanks for your comment! I have never really considered the use of advertising in academic journals. I think that it could be a great way to create revenue online, however an advert on a print journal to me seems quite unrealistic. A scientist would probably have reservations about their work being plastered with adverts! Perhaps more discrete online advertisements that we have grown so accustom to would be a good choice though. It’s just a matter of whether or not the money acquired through this outsider marketing would meet the revenues previously acquired through subscription fees.