Do you have doubts about Open Access?

Do you have doubts about the quality, the feasibility, or the appropriateness of Open Access publishing? If so, check out the April 2, 2009 issue of Peter Suber's SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #132.

The first part of the newsletter is a lengthy section titled:

"A field guide to misunderstandings about open access"

Each of the following 25 points are discussed in plain English. If you are new to Open Access, this might be a good place to start.

(1) "All OA is gold OA."

(2) "Low levels of spontaneous self-archiving reflect opposition to OA."

(3) "OA archiving will kill journal subscriptions."

(4) "OA is about bypassing peer review."

(5) "OK, then, but OA journals skimp on peer review."

(6) "OK, then, but at least *green* OA is about bypassing peer review."
(7) "OA is about punishing greedy or obstructive publishers."
(8) "OA journals couldn't possibly pay their bills."

(9) "OA is a business model."

(10) "All OA journals charge publication fees."

(11) "OK, then. But all *high-quality* OA journals charge publication fees."

(12) "Publication fees at OA journals must be paid by authors out of pocket."

(13) "Publication fees at OA journals are just subscriptions in disguise."

(14) "OA deprives authors of royalties."

(15) "Preprint archiving violates copyright."

(16) "Postprint archiving violates copyright."

(17) "Self-archiving takes too much time."

(18) "Self-archiving hides work more than it exposes work."

(19) "OA invites plagiarism."

(20) "Authors must choose between prestigious publication and OA."

(21) "OA helps readers but not authors."

(22) "All OA is gratis OA."

(23) "OA is about providing access to lay readers."

(24) "OA makes sense for second-rate work, but not for first-rate work."

(25) "The current system is not broken."