Re: The Green and Gold Roads to Open Access

From: Rick Anderson <>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 01:13:18 +0000

Stevan Harnad wrote:

> I'm afraid I have to disagree. Since a Green journal is simply one
> that gives its authors the green light to self-archive, all Gold
> journals are eo ipso Green!

OK, touche. What I should have said is that if a journal is Green, it
will not also be Gold. My question remains: do we want to encourage the
development of Gold journals? If not, if the existence of Gold journals
doesn't really matter, then I guess there's not an issue in my mind. (I
stand by my original statement -- that authors will tend to publish in
the venue that they think will give them the most prestige, regardless
of whether it will give them the most readers -- but then, based on
several things you've said during this exchange, you don't seem to
actually disagree with that statement. It's almost as if you've gotten
lost in a labyrinth of reflexive argumentation, and have lost sight of
the question that instigated the exchange...)

> Perhaps we're fooling ourselves if we imagine there is something else
> about Gold that authors would or should desire, apart from the OA
> that they can already get via Green! Of course Gold journals should be
> encouraged and supported

This is the part I don't get. If we're fooling ourselves to think that
there's anything particularly attractive to authors about publishing in
a Gold journal, then why is it a given that we should encourage and
support the development of Gold journals? If Green is good enough for
authors, readers and publishers, then what's the point of fostering

Rick Anderson
Dir. of Resource Acquisition
University of Nevada, Reno Libraries
(775) 784-6500 x273
Received on Wed Dec 15 2004 - 01:13:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:44 GMT