August 15, 2025Open Access

Novel Aspects of Open-Access / Predatory Science Publishing: Samizdat* Avenue for Novel Ideas and the Concept of Predatory Editors

Key Points

Predatory journals can serve as a platform for novel scientific insights, effectively acting as a contemporary Samizdat for daring researchers.
The criticism aimed at predatory journals often misses their potential benefits, highlighting the need for a balanced perspective in the ongoing debate.
Public acknowledgment of members of editorial boards in predatory journals as predatory editors could alter perceptions of their publishing practices.
Understanding the role of censoring by established academic publishers can reshape how we view the validity of research published in open access journals.

Abstract

Two fundamentally new approach is presented to the ongoing and heated debate around the predatory division of the open access science publishing. 1. The somewhat relaxed peer-review practices of some Open-Access / Predatory OA/P journals have an important, not widely recognized function: it makes possible to disclose novel scientific insights which are automatically censored by the paradigm-oriented or politically manipulated Scholarly / Academic (S/A) publishers. They can be the contemporary “Samizdat” 1 alternative for some original and daring scientists. 2. Much of the critic against OA/P journals is failing even if they are well founded. It can be changed by publicly recognizing each Editorial Board member of every predatory journal as Predatory Editors, i.e. accomplices 2 in the fraudulent, deceptive publishing practices.

Novel Aspects of Open-Access / Predatory Science Publishing: Samizdat* Avenue for Novel Ideas and the Concept of Predatory Editors

Key Points

Abstract

Cite This Study