Inside Higher Ed reports on a highly appropos flip to open access by a journal whose core subject matter appears to be measuring science. Given that monopoly control of this metadata about science appears to be the next frontier of monetization for publisher-cum-“data analysis” company Elsevier, it makes a lot of sense that scientists who depend on access to that kind of data would be anxious to keep their own data open and free.
I think this kind of flipping is really where our productive energy needs to go. If the academy (libraries, scholar-led efforts) can provide journal editorial boards with an easy, sustainable alternative to Elsevier for publishing infrastructure, the authors and readers will follow the editorial board to a new imprint. We need more like this.