Introduction: The Wrong Question Everyone Is Asking The publishing industry is currently obsessed with the wrong question. Everyone is asking how artificial intelligence will change publishing. Will AI replace writers? Will it automate editorial workflows? Will it flood the market with low-quality content or unlock a new golden age of productivity? These are not useless … Read more
Introduction For years, the conversation around artificial intelligence in academic publishing has been framed in the most predictable way possible. AI will make things faster. Faster peer review. Faster copyediting. Faster production. Faster publishing. It is a comforting narrative. It suggests continuity. It implies that the system itself remains intact, only accelerated. That narrative is … Read more
Introduction For two decades, publishers have operated under a simple assumption: visibility leads to traffic, and traffic leads to revenue. Search engines made that assumption feel almost natural. You publish content, optimize it, and if you rank well, users arrive. The system was not perfect, but it was predictable. There was a clear exchange. Publishers … Read more
Introduction Academic publishing has always had an easy scapegoat: bad writing. When journals are overwhelmed, when reviewers are slow, when editorial timelines stretch into months, the blame often lands on the quality of submissions. Too many weak papers. Too many poorly structured arguments. More recently, too many AI-generated manuscripts flooding the system. It sounds convincing, … Read more
Introduction For decades, academic publishing has operated on a relatively stable economic logic. Publishers produce, curate, and distribute scholarly content. In return, they earn revenue through subscriptions, licensing agreements with libraries, and, more recently, article processing charges tied to open access. It is a model built around access. Access to journals. Access to databases. Access … Read more