Wednesday, November 22, 2017

The Vanity Press


Retraction Watch has a bombshell, an injunction against OMICS for deceptive business practices.  Now what pray tell are those.

In her decision granting the injunction Judge Gloria Navarro wrote

The evidence produced by the FTC demonstrates that Defendants engaged in probable misrepresentations regarding journal publishing. On the OMICS website, for example, OMICS makes numerous representations indicating that it follows standard peer-review practices. (See PX12 Att. L at 657, 773, 748, Ex. 12 to Mot. for Prelim Inj., ECF No. 9-12). 1 Under standard industry practice, the peer review process often takes several weeks or even months and involves multiple rounds of substantive feedback from experts in the related field. (See PX13 ¶¶ 9–10). In contrast, the FTC has provided evidence that Defendants’ peer review practices, in numerous instances, took a matter of days and contained no comments or substantive feedback
The Court found that the FTC would likely succeed in proving the merits of its claims. 
This inadequacy is further demonstrated by statements from purported “editors,” which indicate that they never received manuscripts to review or else even agreed to be listed as an editor. (See, e.g., PX03 ¶¶ 3–4; PX11 ¶ 7). In some instances, individuals listed as “editors” without permission requested removal from the website without success. (See, e.g., PX02 ¶ 4; PX08¶¶ 4–7; PX06 ¶ 11).
and the injunction is a doozy.  OMICS is enjoined from (among other things
making any representation, or assisting others in making any representation, expressly or by implication, that any journal or other publication is peer-reviewed unless any work product submitted to that journal or publication is reviewed by peers who are subject matter experts, who are not journal employees, and who evaluate the quality and credibility of the work product, and the representation is otherwise non-misleading;
Now whom does Eli know who publishes with OMICS?

Ned Nikolov, and amusingly what points does Ned make about his OMICS publication:
Ned also gives talks at OMICS conferences about which the judge had a few choice words.

For more on Nikolov see Eli and ATTP

4 comments:

George Montgomery said...

Nikolov and Zeller should have submitted their work to the scholarly Journal of the Open Atmospheric Society - where no politically motivated peer review interference occurs, where ideas may be exchanged and examined without fear of retribution, where science can be understood by the public, where verum luce est, ....

gallopingcamel said...

Judge Gloria Navarro may be in some trouble herself given her part in the Bundy ranch trial:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nevada-militia/u-s-judge-warns-of-mistrial-in-nevada-rancher-bundys-trial-idUSKBN1E52P2?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

marcoclimate said...

Why (and how) would Navarro be in trouble?

snarkrates said...

Dude, That's gallopingcamel. Expecting sense out of that brain is like trying to pour from a Klein bottle.