It's no secret that there are weird things about in the political economy of 'academia' these days. In a nutshell, it seems that demand is higher than ever for the stuff that academics produce and that people are paying more than ever to get those 'products.' In plain terms, more people are going to college than ever and they're paying extraordinary amounts of money to go. Yet, teaching positions that pay living wages - not to mention wages that are commensurate with the cost of becoming qualified to teach - are amazingly rare. But I want to leave that aspect aside for a moment and think about publishing.
Academic products qua writing fall into a bizarre economic limbo that deserves some attention because, I think, the limbo depends on the fact that no one talks about it. In brief, researchers win and then spend lots of money doing research, for which they are not personally remunerated. Research grants typically cannot be used to pay rents, mortgages, utilities, student loans, etc.: all those things that adults need to pay while living as adult members of society.
After conducting research, researchers spend endless unpaid hours writing up their research into 6000 word articles 100,000 word books, and countless public presentations. The texts they write are then evaluated by unpaid peers who spend their own uncounted hours - without pay - anonymously (and thoughtfully) reading, commenting upon, then rereading and reporting upon their colleagues' articles. Unpaid journal editors, who are not anonymous, ferry the texts, comments, and revisions back and forth, from colleague, to peer, to publication platform.
Those journals then publish the articles in print and online, where they are accessible to institutions and individuals who pay for subscriptions. Institutions, like universities, pay particularly high fees for access to these journals.
So where does the money go?
Recently, I asked a colleague who had published a peer-reviewed article in a well-known journal, "So what's the split on the royalties for your article?" My colleague drew a total (and reasonable) blank at the question because the topic isn't even broached. The economic dimension for text-producers is totally ignored, even though the whole publication system is supported by fees.
I joked that even in the micro-economy of independent music production, where every publication is understood to be a money-losing endeavor, we still talk about splitting the profits after expenses. Usually labels and bands split the profits 50/50. Labels usually keep a spreadsheet of the income for releases, which ideally come in runs of 1000 units. And labels usually demonstrate that they've lost money. But everyone's happy to support this labor of love for a form of cultural production that - like academic research - is a good unto itself.
Happily, ProQuest does discuss royalties with respect to doctoral dissertations. Royalties came up, for me, when I paid $90 to have my dissertation available 'open-access.' I chose to pay for open access because many of my peers overseas, distinguished and active archaeologists, do not have institutional subscriptions to major academic databases. ProQuest informed me that, by paying for open access, I was relinquishing a claim to any royalties from my dissertation.
As I understand it (and I'm willing to be educated better on this, if I'm wrong), ProQuest sells dissertations in hard copy to anyone who is willing to purchase them. Now, I paid $90 for my dissertation to be open access. I should still have access to the royalties from sales. What if it becomes a runaway hit and sells a million copies? Why would open access (which I paid for) annul my right to royalties?
Well, of course all contracts are negotiable. So I attempted to negotiate. I told my dissertation office staff that I wanted to retain rights to royalties. ProQuest responded that this was not an option. Negotiation attempted and failed.
Now, one might also ask, "Must a PhD publish their dissertation on ProQuest?" Honestly, that was not something that was presented as an option. Embargoes exist, wherein one can have their dissertation's publication delayed by up to 2 years, usually to protect informants and other people named in the dissertation. But that requires special permission. And it's only for 2 years.
What if I really wanted to press the issue? How would I go about doing that? I'm not sure that there's even a structure for that sort of negotiation in the dissertation publishing system.
Well, no one will actually buy my dissertation anyway. I'm mostly glad that it's available via open access to my peers, especially in Peru. Yet, sadly, when I try to access it through the ProQuest site, it's surprisingly difficult to find it...and to find where one would even look to download it.
The point is that there are always things that appear to be fixed, and we should push back on them when we feel they're badly built. Sometimes we'll hit walls and that will be enough for the moment. Yet, sometimes it's worth it to keep pushing and pushing until the structure is reconfigured to a better form.
In the meantime, I plan to employ a workaround. When the dissertation is finally published, I'll post a copy on my personal website, free of charge, and easy to download.
No comments:
Post a Comment