PRISM: Open Letter to Oxford University Press

Open Letter to Henry Reece, Chief Executive Oxford University Press
Dear Henry Reece,
I am writing as an individual member of Oxford University (MA, DPhil) and also as an author of Open Access articles in OUP journals. I am heavily engaged in developing new approaches to scientific scholarly publishing and am writing to ask about OUP’s involvement with the recently launched PRISM initiative from the AAP (http://www.prismcoalition.org/). This initiative is an
undisguised coalition to discredit Open Access publishing and its launch a
few days ago has generated universal dismay and anger in many quarters
including several outside mainstream publishing. The press release was
reported in full by Peter Suber on his Open Access News blog
(http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/earlham/dGCQ/~3/147374721/2007_08_19_fosblogarchive.html)
where he has objectively answered and dismissed the basis of PRISM and its
methods. PRISM describes all Open Access publishing as “junk science”, presumably including the papers with yourselves which I have co-authored (http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/suppl_1/D515, http://bioinformatics.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/23/4315, etc.). There is much more from PRISM which is both deliberately factually incorrect and
misleading and I cannot see how a reputable scholarly organisation such as
OUP could be associated with it. Indeed at least one similar publisher
(Rockefeller University Press
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/earlham/dGCQ/~3/150207794/2007_08_26_fosblogarchive.html)
writes:
“I am writing to request that a disclaimer be placed on the PRISM website
indicating that the views presented on the site do not necessarily reflect
those of all members of the AAP. We at the Rockefeller University Press
strongly disagree with the spin that has been placed on the issue of open
access by PRISM.” [rest of letter omitted here]
The PRISM site is so incoherent and so removed from good publishing practice that it is almost impossible to extract any clear message except:
“PRISM sees all Open Access publishers as a threat to be destroyed by whatever means are most expedient”.
Peter Suber writes on his Open Access blog
(http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2007_08_26_fosblogarchive.html#3366666992239868540):
“I suspect that AAP/PSP did not consult its members before launching PRISM. But in any case the members should know that the launch of PRISM tarnishes them, alienates authors, readers, and referees, and, if successful, will only harm science by entrenching rather than removing access barriers to the results of publicly-funded research.”
– a clear analysis which publishers should take very seriously.
The purpose of my letter is simply to request factual information from OUP
about its involvement with PRISM and any support for its “aims”. Since PRISM itself has not reacted to any of the recent comment it is unclear whether PRISM is de facto composed of all the members of the AAP or whether it uses their unsought goodwill to reinforce the apparent strength of the PRISM organization.
This mail is an Open Letter (posted on my blog, http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust) and I would intend to publish
your reply in toto and unedited since your position (and those of similar
publishers) is of great public interest). If there is anything you would
not wish to be published, please indicate. Alternatively you may leave a
comment on the blog itself. (My blog itself, though strongly advocating
Open Access and particularly Open Data, attempts to be fair and accurate).
Thanks in advance
Peter Murray-Rust
[NOTE AFTERWARDS: I have tried to send a copy of this by mail to oxfordjournals.org but so far the mail has bounced, so I would be grateful if any reader could forward it.]