During research about different publishing models I came across this graph about the cost breakdowns (focusing on published academic journals, unsurprisingly). The section which intrigued me most was the calculation of added cost, if proofreaders and peer reviewers were properly paid for their time. That led me to wonder: who should be responsible for quality control in the market for information?
To make it translate more easily, let's imagine that instead it's like agriculture. Is it the farmer's job to ensure the highest quality of product goes to market, because they take such pride in their work? After all, they get public subsidies simply to plant, grow, and harvest.
Is it the supplier's role? Their brand faces the customer, so they'll suffer any reputation damage from too much faulty product being supplied. Is it the role of the retailer/wholesalers, so that they can identify and neutralise any consumer risk in their supply chains?
Is it the role of government, to ensure that all actors in the market operate to a high minimal standard, to minimise any threats to the population at large? (Particularly topical now, with the commentary about who should do what to contain any contagion from covid 19.)
Should all the responsibility be transferred to the end consumer, where people can do as they like on the basis of "buyer beware"?
Is it instead up to activist nonprofit groups, to conduct clandestine investigations, questioning the way the market works, and why?
Is it instead part of the work of other farmers, to take the time to check each other's work, to advance the base standard of the entire industry? Hopefully then, one day, someone will benefit from that process to make a breakthrough which will revolutionise and advance their field in unforeseen ways.
No comments:
Post a Comment