Wednesday, July 10, 2002, 3:17:32 PM, you wrote:

RA> Sage Publications would like to clarify our position with respect to both
RA> EBSCO and ProQuest.  We have decided to remove our content from the
RA> aggregated databases known as EBSCOhost and ProQuest.  This decision is
RA> effective at the end of this year, but EBSCO and ProQuest will continue to
RA> fulfill subscriptions to their conclusion up until the end of 2003.   We
RA> have taken this decision, which we recognize will disappoint some in the
RA> library community, after almost 10 years of experimenting with aggregated
RA> databases.

The key word above is "experimenting", which is exactly what all of
the publishers and aggregators have been, and are, doing.  As we know,
the standard model of journal subscription and management that has
served us for a couple of centuries (we send money, someone sends us a
journal, whether for personal or library subscriptions) is on the way
out, like it or not.  Will it be replaced by free journals on the web,
paid for journals on the web, combinations of print and web, of any
one of a number of other options.  And, there will be new options
available in the next few years that we've not even dreamed of yet.

RA> First, the increasing substitution of the databases for actual
RA> journal subscriptions  jeopardizes the continued viability of our journal
RA> publishing program.  Journals cannot sustain themselves without income from
RA> subscriptions.

This is interesting.  I accept and understand the point they're
making.  What surprises me is that, after all of the librarians on
these lists and elsewhere have said that they'd never drop a
subscription because it is in an aggregated service, there has been an
impact on their subscriptions.  Are they telling us a story, a good
excuse?  Have bunches of us been dropping subscriptions without
admitting it?  Or, perhaps most likely, the professors who had
individual subscriptions have dropped them due to the availability of
the content through campus licenses?  Or maybe a combination of all
three?

RA> Unfortunately, the royalties earned from EBSCOhost and
RA> ProQuest are not substantial enough to support the cost of publishing a
RA> journal.

And if the royalties were substantial enough, then our database
subscription rates would go up, and many of us would then be unhappy
about that.

RA> We would potentially be confronted with ceasing publication of a
RA> number of titles.  Decreasing the amount of available scholarly research
RA> will not serve the academic community well.

Purest nonsense.  Half of the published "research" is pure crap.  It
is redundant, trivial, and a host of other adjectives.  That's true in
library science, in physics, and in all other fields.  Yes, we can
quibble forever about whether it is half, or 40 percent, or 60
percent, that could be done without, but having MORE stuff published
does not mean we've done anything BETTER.  Of course if "serving the
academic community well" means that we can all have eight articles
published to help get tenure instead of five, maybe they're right,
though I still don't consider that anything BETTER.

RA> Second, we believe that our
RA> current and future electronic publishing plans for Sage journals will
RA> provide great benefits to the library community, as we will describe below.

I'm willing to give them a chance.  After all, I don't have any
choice, do I?

RA> backward and forward. Each Collection will be hosted on a platform enabling
RA> key word search functionality, browsing functionality, and reference and
RA> citation linking capability. The Collections are designed to be dynamic
RA> research tools for students and faculty members in the social sciences.
RA> Sage currently plans to release new Collections in new disciplines each
RA> year.

This may make business sense, as it is designed to get the students
and faculty in each of those disciplines locked into using their
particular subset of literature of their field.  However, it probably
adds yet one more complication to library instruction, reference work,
and other activities we deal with, but, hey, we're used to that.

cheers

dan

--
Dan Lester, Data Wrangler  dan@RiverOfData.com 208-283-7711
3577 East Pecan, Boise, Idaho  83716-7115 USA
www.riverofdata.com  www.gailndan.com  Stop Global Whining!