Found this article by Gene s. Fazio and Thomas McDonald in the "Journal of Reading"
(Vol. 13, No. 4 (Jan., 1970), pp. 289-291): https://www.jstor.org/stable/40009544
Obviously, because it's JSTOR, they want to charge me $42 to read the 3 pages of text from 1970!
This my friends, in a nutshell is what is wrong with the world! The authors wrote this article 48 years ago. And instead of it benefiting humanity, by making all older infrequently cited articles FREE,
JSTOR chose to extract economic rent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_rentfar in excess of the cost of running their service. By all accounts JSTOR keep the money they charge for accessing content; they do not pass it on to the original authors/creators ...
see: http://anterotesis.com/wordpress/2011/07/economics-of-jstor/
PDF (snapshot in case it disappears): The-Economics-of-JSTOR--Anterotesis.pdf
"12 million academic journal articles, books, and primary sources in 75 disciplines."
But if you are not a member of an academic institution, you're going to pay dearly for access.
$42 for 3 pages is enough to eliminate my "curiosity" for this article. 😞
The first page is "freely available" on the preview page:
This article sounds like exactly what I'm looking for!!! 😍
But on principal, I won't pay $42 to JSTOR for 3 pages!
I would gladly pay the authors for their work if they self-published it.
But I'm not supporting a "PayWall" (Rent) company who directly caused the death of Aaron Swartz. 😢 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
I leave you, the reader, to decide for yourself how you feel about JSTOR after watching
"The Internet's Own Boy" https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3268458/ [a must-watch documentary!]
I for one will boycott this company and reaffirm my quest to make all my knowledge/learning freely available to anyone who wants to make good use of it.
Maybe I will be able to read the article when I go back to University to do my PhD ... 🤔
nelsonic
commented
5 years ago
Found this article by Gene s. Fazio and Thomas McDonald in the "Journal of Reading" (Vol. 13, No. 4 (Jan., 1970), pp. 289-291): https://www.jstor.org/stable/40009544
Obviously, because it's JSTOR, they want to charge me $42 to read the 3 pages of text from 1970!
This my friends, in a nutshell is what is wrong with the world! The authors wrote this article 48 years ago. And instead of it benefiting humanity, by making all older infrequently cited articles FREE,
JSTOR chose to extract economic rent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_rent far in excess of the cost of running their service. By all accounts JSTOR keep the money they charge for accessing content; they do not pass it on to the original authors/creators ...
see: http://anterotesis.com/wordpress/2011/07/economics-of-jstor/
PDF (snapshot in case it disappears): The-Economics-of-JSTOR--Anterotesis.pdf
https://about.jstor.org/
But if you are not a member of an academic institution, you're going to pay dearly for access. $42 for 3 pages is enough to eliminate my "curiosity" for this article. 😞
The first page is "freely available" on the preview page:
This article sounds like exactly what I'm looking for!!! 😍 But on principal, I won't pay $42 to JSTOR for 3 pages! I would gladly pay the authors for their work if they self-published it. But I'm not supporting a "PayWall" (Rent) company who directly caused the death of Aaron Swartz. 😢
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
I leave you, the reader, to decide for yourself how you feel about JSTOR after watching "The Internet's Own Boy" https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3268458/ [a must-watch documentary!]
I for one will boycott this company and reaffirm my quest to make all my knowledge/learning freely available to anyone who wants to make good use of it.
Maybe I will be able to read the article when I go back to University to do my PhD ... 🤔