Subscription journals are increasingly flipping to open access, and joining the many journals around the world which have always been published “free to view”. There is an accepted moral dimension that argues for scientific and academic research to be publicly available for the greater good, but are there any downsides to this assumption? This debate proposes that open access is likely to lead to lower quality content being made publicly available since it is changing the editorial priorities that currently only select the best content for publication. By using a formal debate we will argue both sides of the proposal and ask our audience (in person and online) to participate by asking our panellists challenging questions and voting for which argument they find most persuasive. Let the battle commence!
Editor-in-Chief, The Lancet PsychiatryUnited Kingdom
Joan Marsh is the Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet Psychiatry. Joan was on the Council of the European Association of Science Editors for 12 years, including six as President. She is now Chair of its Gender Policy Committee and an Associate Editor of European Science Editing.
Consultant: retired, PSP ConsultingUnited Kingdom
Now mostly retired from publishing.
Head of Editorial, DOAJUnited Kingdom
Matt joined Hindawi in London in 2016 as Head of Research Integrity, overseeing the publication ethics processes and policies and managing the Research Integrity Manager and a team of Research Integrity Specialists. He was Head of Editorial Policy and Ethics from 2020-22. From 2022-24, he worked at the charity UKRIO as a Research Integrity Manager, advising researchers and institutions and managing social media.