We have no voice, and we must scream: the social science academic journal publication model is systemically broken, predominantly damaging early career researchers.

Achieving scholarly publication within social science academic journals is now near-normatively marred by lengthy review periods, sometimes lasting years. This is caused primarily by influx of publications driven by "publish-or-perish" culture in UK academia, particularly from Academic Early-Career Researchers (AcECRs) most subjected to this edict. This paper examines in depth the current documented issues with achieving publication, and the impacts that predominantly affect AcECRs, professional services ECRs (PsECRs), as well as wider members of the scholarship-producing academic community whose experiences are often sidelined. Saliently, all ERCs are invariably required to publish to maintain contracts, demonstrate expertise, secure grants and remain in employment - thus, ECRs are most harmed by current issues. Collating varied observations, I argue the existing journal publication model is systemically broken. Reactively, this work advocates solutions: a radical shift towards prioritising open access preprints, and withdrawing journal articles where no review actions are undertaken within reasonable timelines. Pathways for promoting equity are discussed, as is the relevance of the CRediT framework for determining scholarly contributions. Further collaborative and ECR-led solution-focussed discussion is welcomed.