Why the Current Model of Academic Publishing Is Ethically Flawed—and What We Can Do to Change It

This is the published version of the article, incorporating revisions made after peer review. The preprint of this article was published on Zenodo in March 2025 (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15115778) Abstract: This article offers a reasoned call for urgent reform of the academic journal publishing system. It focuses on the ethical flaws of the current for-profit model. This model enables the transfer of public funds into the profit margins of private companies that add no meaningful value to research and even limit access to knowledge. The article describes how feedback loops in metrics used in the evaluation of scientific publishing exacerbate structural inequalities and make it difficult to break out of the system. Moreover, the opportunity for easy profit attracts dishonest actors and fuels the rise of predatory journals, which in turn corrodes public trust in science. Without systemic reforms, the current system could also undermine artificial intelligence–driven research outcomes by enabling models to be trained on a growing number of substandard scientific publications. The article concludes with ten specific proposals for action, aimed at stimulating further discussion within and beyond academia. Keywords: academic journals, academic publishing ethics, artificial intelligence andfair use, diamond open access, for-profit academic publishing, intellectual propertyrights in science, research integrity Excerpt from the introduction: "Here is what a typical conversation with someone outside academia about academic journal publishing looks like:• How much do they pay you for publishing an academic paper?• Nothing. Authors publish research papers for free; it’s part of our job.• Oh, then the people reviewing your paper must earn a lot?• No, we review the work of our peers for free.• Then perhaps the publisher bears high costs for language proofreading?• Not really. Authors are required to submit texts already proofread, preferably by a native speaker.• Then why does your fifteen-page article behind a paywall cost nearly 40 euros?• Because I couldn’t get funding for the open-access fee this time. Look, anyone can read this other paper of mine for free, but my university had to pay over 3,000 euros for that.• Wait a second—let me see if I’ve got this right. You’re doing publicly funded research, you publish it for free, other scientists review it for free, you cover the cost of foreign language editing, and then your university pays thousands of euros to some private company so they can make money off it?• Basically, yes.• What kind of loser would agree to a system like that? The problem is that we all accept this system by participating in it."