Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Fake Journals From Elsevier

Posted by Soulskill on from the at-least-they're-consistent dept.

daemonburrito writes "Last week, we learned about Elsevier publishing a bogus journal for Merck. Now, several librarians say that they have uncovered an entire imprint of 'advertorial' publications. Excerpta Medica, a 'strategic medical communications agency,' is an Elsevier division. Along with the now infamous Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, it published a number of other 'journals.' Elsevier CEO Michael Hansen now admits that at least six fake journals were published for pharmaceutical companies."

2 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. More reason to ditch publishers by langelgjm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interesting. This militates against the argument that the "imprimatur" of a publisher always adds to a journal's legitimacy, and is one more reason to ditch money-grubbing publishers for open-access journals.

    That is really a huge blow to the reputation of Elsevier... of course they publish hundreds (thousands?) of journals, so in absolute terms maybe it is not that big a deal, but still...

    --
    "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
  2. Can this be considered fraud? by msobkow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The journals seem to be intended to mislead the reader into believing that research and reporting has been done which has not. Does that not constitute fraud? Would there not be an option to have the publisher and the pharmacorp charged with fraud?

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.