Abstract
The paper gives 4 reasons to abolish pre-publication peer review and print journals. First, every print journal’s editor and referees effectively say to its subscribers, “We will decide for you what is (and is not) worth reading.” Therein lies the same thought control that the Catholic Church practiced for 407 years with its list of forbidden books. Second, print journals’ pre-publication peer-review process is so seriously flawed that it should be scrapped. Interesting examples of each of the 3 types of flaws are given. One example recites my experience with an unethical journal editor (Alexander Bird). Third, end-of-process inspection is an ineffective quality-control system. And fourth, the internet is a far better distribution system than the one print journals use.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
