Bypassing the ASAP System II
It happened again. Remember how Sames’s original retractions completely bypassed the ASAP Alerts system and went straight to print? Well, today’s retraction in Org. Lett. also went straight to print. Surprise!
Contrast that example with this publication, also an addition/correction in Org. Lett., that was posted on the Web as an ASAP alert on June 10th and was included in the e-mail alert for the same day. You can see for yourself…it’s still sitting on the ASAP page. Why do some publications/additions/corrections go straight-to-print and others don’t? Sames is batting 4-for-4 while I can’t think of a single other example of this happening.
And I refuse to believe that it went straight to print because it was important and “happened” to be ready the same day the issue was to be published. Sames obviously knew it was ready before today, because he spoke to the New York Times yesterday (at the latest).
While most of you probably don’t care about this topic, I find it distressing on a couple of fronts. First, it hurts science’s tradition of openness. The move seems like an attempt to shrink exposure to the scientific community by circumventing the (wonderful) ASAP alert system. Second, it’s un-American. I’d hope that all scientists are held to the same standards/procedures. Bypassing ASAP seems like an “old-boys-club” move. Our field has taken a lot of grief about this, and rightfully so, on account of the fact that fostering “smoke-filled-room” conditions probably discourages minority subgroups from entering scientific academica.
The time has come for ACS Publications to hire an ombudsman.
Explore posts in the same categories: Chemistry