RE: Does BMC's business model conflict with Editorial Independence?

[Phil Davis <pmd8@cornell.edu>]

Matt Cockerill wrote:

"The suggestion that open access journal editors are conflicted 
because their journal's revenue depends on article processing 
charges is really just the same old suggestion that open access 
journals in general are conflicted by article processing charges. 
But as has been widely pointed out, if that is a conflict of 
interest, then all journals with page charges have that same 
conflict of interest. And since traditional publishers justify 
subscription price increases based on the increasing page count 
of their journals, traditional publishers too face the very same 
potential conflict of interest."

Response:

I fail to see this as a strong argument by similarity.  Page 
charges would have the same corruptive effect on editorial 
independence only if editors received a "share of the revenue" 
(Matt's words) for each check that was sent in by authors.  The 
reward system for BMC editors is essentially that of any 
commission salesman.  Accept more articles, get richer.  Their 
business model is that simple.

I am also told by a BMC editor that they are economic 
consequences for waiving article processing fees.  Not only do 
editors forfeit their commission, but they are required to pay 
for these pro bono articles out of their own coffers.  Both of 
these BMC business practices seem to contradict ethical policies 
set up to separate the business interests of the publisher and 
editorial independence.  As I quoted yesterday from the World 
Association of Medical Editors, "Editors-in-chief should 
establish procedures that guard against the influence of 
commercial and personal self-interest on editorial decisions." 
[3]

Moreover, I do not see a strong and direct argument between page 
counts, editorial remuneration, and justification for higher 
subscription prices.  I wouldn't disagree that some editors of 
large journals receive more compensation than editors of smaller 
journals, yet I don't see the direct and immediate link between 
editorial compensation and subscription prices.  A police officer 
may receive a raise at the end of the year for doing good work, 
but the officer that receives a direct cut from every ticket he 
issues has a direct conflict of interest between his financial 
well-being and his obligation to be a fair and honest arbitrator 
of the law.  In the same way, the editorial remuneration 
practices of BMC do not give me assurances that BMC editors are 
fair and honest arbitrators of their editorial responsibilities.

--Phil Davis