Rejected Scientific Paper Recycled as an Ad 123
Roland Piquepaille writes "In this article, The Scientist reveals a curious and probably unique story. Two years ago, a researcher at Brown University submitted a paper to a scientific medicine journal. Then he received a note from the editor saying that his paper would not interest the journal readers. Thinking that his article was unfairly rejected before peer review, he decided to publish a two-page ad with the contents of his paper in the same journal. He even asked readers if they thought the contents interesting and received 33 positive replies. Read this summary before telling me what you think and if you've heard about a similar story."
just some thoughts.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:5, Informative)
The scientist "critiqued a 2003 Dow-funded paper (published) in Texas Medicine"
In other words, he argued that the industry funded paper was a lie, but had a hard time getting his arguments published.
Personally, I wish that he had gotten the article peer reviewed and published in another paper before doing this.
I wonder if he can now claim that he was "published in JOEM." Can people cite this work? Probably not, I'm thinking.
The effects of industry on scientific communication is pretty interesting. The overproscription of Statins in the US because the FDA was effectivly bribed is just one example.
Considering the various technology transfer acts passed by congress, more and more previously government funded is becoming the province of industry. The effects on the integrity of scientific research are only slowly becoming apparent.
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's an analogy to what he did: let's say you read something in your local newspaper that you think is improperly argued. You write up your objection and ask the New York Times to run it as a bylined piece. They return it and tell you to try it as a letter to the editor in the newspaper that ran the original story.
The guy isn't facing total suppression of his work by The Man; he's insisting on publishing it in a far more prestigious form than any reasonable person could think it warrants.
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:3, Insightful)
As
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:2)
1) I don't consider the failure to buy his way into a particular journal to be "total suppression".
2) Perhaps you've never seen a scientific journal -- with some very rare exceptions, they have 2-4 pages of ad
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:2)
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:2)
It beats submitting the thing as a Cliff post on Slashdot.
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:1)
Re:just some thoughts.... (Score:1)
Going the advertisement/straight to the media route is generally bad, as that is what bit Pons and Fleischman.
A more interesting question would be why no
RTFA (Score:1)
33 replies of Interesting.... (Score:3, Interesting)
To some folk in the world, 5 hurricanes in a row in one small part of the world is considered "interesting".....
Skipping past peer review sort of invalidates the point of being some of the journals, doesn't it?
Hey, if you have something to say, we all want to be heard, but paid distribution of your comment may always be seen as self-promoting.
In either case, did anyone figure out if he was right?
Re:33 replies of Interesting.... (Score:2)
Heck one hurricane is interesting where theres hardly any wind.
"Skipping past peer review sort of invalidates the point of being some of the journals, doesn't it?"
Apparently he was more interested in the readers' views than the peer review itself.
"Hey, if you have something to say, we all want to be heard, but paid distribution of your comment may always be seen as self-promoting."
Me thinks
Re:33 replies of Interesting.... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what he was protesting, I think.
If he had been rejected after peer review, it would have been a different story.
Re:33 replies of Interesting.... (Score:4, Informative)
If the bulk of the readership is going to skip the article because it presents no new information or because it deals with a topic that no one cares about, then the editors are right to reject it.
In every journal, the "Instructions to Authors" section spells out what kind of manuscript will be considered for publication... the topics appropirate for this journal, the kinds of research, etc. If your paper isn't right for this journal, publish it somewhere else.
Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Years (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
That's monumentally stupid. You're saying that a higher percentage of posts complaining about said post will help him? Esp. when said post is rated at +5 and has community support?
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
Yes, absolutely. Slashdot's ad driven. More comments == more ads served. More ads serve == more ad revenue. By posting Roland stories, they're benefitting themselves. They don't give a rat's ass what the community thinks. If they did, would we see dupes ever again?
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
Ever wonder why Katz is gone?
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
Maybe. On the other hand, when Katz was around, Slashdot wasn't completely ad supported.
Re:Years (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Years (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Years (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Years (Score:3, Informative)
He blatantly rips off content to get cheap hits on his site for ad revenue.
Read this [thedarkcitadel.com] to see why.
Re:Years (Score:2)
And remember that if they do review and reject your /. submission, you can just buy an ad with the same content.
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
Reviewing submissions is the key here. Editing really isn't their function, as editing implies they have a direct effect on the content, instead of being gatekeepers. (Some editorialize more than others though.)
Don't join stories in which you have no interest. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Please don't visit and comment on Slashdot discussions in which you have no interest.
I find that I am interested in only about one-twentieth of the articles on Slashdot. I was interested in this article, and was surprised to see people doing an anger trip over it.
Three points: 1) Roland does not have much chance of making money from his Slashdot articles. (See quote below.) 2) He puts a lot of work into his articles, which may be the reason they get accepted by Slashdot. 3) By complaining unreasonabl
Re:Don't join stories in which you have no interes (Score:1, Offtopic)
Are you serious? Really? You honestly think that this [primidi.com] is "a lot of work"? That is incredibly sad. Virtually the entire "article" consists of blocks of direcct quotations from press releases and other primary sources. Just like every single article he's ever posted. He then embelishes with a sprinkling of phony fluff commentary ("ohh tell me what YOU think!") merely to stave of accusations of plagairism (which h
Yes, it is a lot of work... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Yes, it is a lot of work, and so is Slashdot. How can you object to Roland, but not object to Slashdot?
I have an interest in Roland's article, and I am commenting because I don't want to see them discouraged.
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
I did think it was odd how you were encouraged to go to the "summary", but I read the article without going there and therefore the submission did not achieve Mr Piquepaille's goals of more hits for his site.
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
MOD PARENT DOWN; PARENT IS CONTENT-FREE (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Years (Score:1, Offtopic)
approach (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:approach (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Peer review is there to determine scientific correctness, not whether a paper should be published or not. There is nothing inappropriate about editorial prescreening for fit and impact -- otherwise the peer review system would be overrun. This manuscript was a criticism of a paper in a different, obscure journal and it's not in the least surprising that it was rejected before review. It should have been submitted as an unreviewed letter to the original journal.
2) Any additional exposure his paper may have gained through this stunt is more than balanced out by the fact that Egilman will now permanently be known in the field as "the nut who ran his stupid letter as an advertisement".
3) The "indirect ties" thing is ludicrous. Anyone who works in a field has "indirect ties" of that degree. Egilman, as I said, is a paranoid nut but the real idiot here is the editor at International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health who used this as an opportunity to throw dirt at a competitor. As though his journal has never rejected a paper about which a similarly far-fetched conspiracy theory could have been made.
Re:approach (Score:2)
I have to disagree - I've refereed for several journals, and always one element of review is whether this is the appropriate journal or not.
In a couple cases I know the editor followed my recommendation and had the article published in an affiliated journal which was more appropriate. The "affiliated journal" thing is important, because if it was simply rejected it would've had to be refereed a
Re:approach (Score:1)
No Story... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:No Story... (Score:2)
What Piquepaille neglected to mention is that it was actually a test run for the new "pay to publish" system most scientific journals are considering.
Another Roland Piquepaille special! (Score:5, Insightful)
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, another few hundred links that may actually be of interest to nerds and that may actually matter go rotting in the submission queue.
Jesus wept. What have we done to deserve this?
Dave
Re:Another Roland Piquepaille special! (Score:1)
If Slashdot isn't supplying what you demand, then seek a new site.
Seriously, do you expect him to go away if all his submissions generate 100+ comments even if half of them are bitch bitch bitching? Let me put it another way: We still have dupes, stories with factual errors, and grammar abuse in the articles.
Re:Another Roland Piquepaille special! (Score:1)
You want the real answer? (Score:1)
No, seriously. If you think
Re:You want the real answer? (Score:2)
As well, your rhethorical solution fails to preserve the momentum and history of the community that we all have spent years developing.
What high editorial standards? (Score:3, Insightful)
If anything's hurting Slashdot, it's the posters, especially all the annoying morons who seem to have crawled out of the woodwork for this article.
Get a life.
True! (Score:2)
.
-shpoffo
Re:Another Roland Piquepaille special! (Score:2)
If no-one else seems to be doing it... (Score:2, Interesting)
MOD PARENT DOWN FLAMEBAIT (Score:1, Flamebait)
ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:1)
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Where does Slashdot claim to have any journalistic integrity?
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:2)
So, while Slashdot makes no claims itself, many geeks act as if Slashdot was about as trustable as an online source is going to get. Usually - not always, Cmdr Taco isn't God - Slashdot is an extremely
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Wow, I seriously disagree with this. Slashdot has demonstrated bias and sensationalism numerous times. If you like Linux, FireFox, OSS in general, Farscape, etc then you're happy here. If you don't
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:2)
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
I know that the editors don't actually read the site - the dupes pretty much prove that - but seriously, I'm paying for this site. I made a choice to subscribe, before Roland came around. Slashdot has had it's moments but seriously... Come on guys!
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:2)
Here's one idea...
1. Have someone who shares our anti-Roland sentiments write some original, intriguing content that is exemplary of the type of 'news' and/or 'stuff' that matters to the patrons of this website.
2. Submit above to slashdot.
3. Set a threshold on the serving website, so that the interesting content switches to a complaint on Roland Piquepaille, when the server load reaches some $CRITICAL_THRESHOLD.
4. REPEAT as necessary.
5. Eventually, the
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:2)
That's it! If we DDOS the Roland Pig-Pile's site, he'll have to stop sumbmitting his borderline-plagarism drivel. And I know just how to do it... Submit a story to Slashdot.org . If that doesn't bring his server to it's knees, nothing will.
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:1)
Or, at least, cut the editor's salary by one day everytime he or she posts a dupe, false, or a scam like this.
Slashdot really needs some competition.
I hope someone will start a 'fork' so that we can all move over. Then slashdot might finallly do something, or become 'stuff that doesn't matter'.
Re:ahhhh!!!!!!! (Score:3)
They did. http://www.technocrat.net/ [technocrat.net]
outdated (Score:2)
Re:outdated (Score:2)
Re:outdated (Score:1)
wasn't this done already? (Score:2)
Roland Piquepaille (Score:2, Insightful)
Slashdot IS a damn troll itself, for continuing to post that lamer's blog plugs. I am going to actively begin searching out another tech site with comments; I like a lot of the comments here at
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2)
The editors ALWAYS sucked. I've been here quite a few years myself, and I cannot remember a single period where there wasn't SOME complaint about how incompetent the Slashdot Editors are.
If it riles you up so much, go to news.google.com. I don't really care where you go provided you ch
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:1)
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2)
Assuming comments aren't what you're after, it seems to me a few well chosen RSS feeds would keep ya happy.
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2)
You might like http://digg.com/ [digg.com], which is completely user-run. The amusing part is that it still manages to get its fair share of dupes and people who whine about trolls posting Slashdot articles.
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2)
Slashdot's a little more general purpose than the sites I've seen. What do you find interesting?
I'm sorry I made that suggestion without giving you a good direction to go. Truth be told, my expectations of Slashdot aren't that high, so I haven't felt the need to go elsewhere. In the mean time, I have a primary interest in CG/Computer rendering. So I hang out at CGTalk.com. (Often they quote Slashdot stories, hehe.)
Re:Roland Piquepaille (Score:2)
I'm interested in anything related to computing; mostly I code games, and while I find the game section articles here interesting (mostly the comments in them, actually,) I learn a lot from the comments in any stories that catch my interest.
So any site or any number of sites centered around tech, with a fair number of comments per story, and a moderatio
Fucking Editors (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fucking Editors (Score:1)
You're talking about Timothy. I don't think he ever looked at the links. Anyway, I wonder what else the Slashdot editors have to do, and how much they're getting paid for this. Even if they do a good job they do what, sort through a bunch of spam and pick out 5-10 interesting stories a day? Sounds like 1 or 2 hours of work a day which could be done from anywhere in the world that has internet access, and that's assuming really quality due diligence (which I highly doubt we see). Moreover, there is very
boobie-shaped clouds (Score:3, Funny)
I was driving through a heavy downpour on my way home from work tonight, and it stopped raining about 2 miles east of my home, and on the last stretch, I noticed some very cool clouds. I looked up, and they were right above me! Dozens of droopy boob clouds! :) Very cool!
I had bookmarked this site a few weeks ago and glad I did, now. The boobie clouds I saw were a little more defined than the ones in the pictures here, but not as pretty with sunset. I guess they are called Mammatus clouds.
http://www.extremeinstability.com/05-4-19.htm [extremeinstability.com]
As an aside, the last time I remember seeing these clouds was when I heard about tornadoes likely about 100 miles to the NorthEast, and the fact that the entire east side of the sky was a heck of a cloud system. So I hit the road, drove past the tornado about 5 miles away (found the hail though!) and about 20 miles later I got to where they had predicted the tornado..but instead I got to see these awesome boobie clouds. Much better than the ones I saw tonight or in the pictures on that page. Perfect, droopy, half-spheres everywhere. Was cool :)
Those are mammatus clouds... (Score:2)
And, yes, they are named as such since they look like boobs. ("Mammatus" comes from "mammory", the milk-producing glands in mammal breasts.)
They are thought to form as parcels of air drop after loading up with precipitation.
http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/cld/ c ldtyp/oth/mm.rxml [uiuc.edu]
And there's the random reply to the random post...
-Jellisky
Re:Those are mammatus clouds... (Score:1)
Actually, "mammatus" and "mammary" both come from "mamma", Latin for "breast", rather than the one coming from the other.
Now let's hope the cycle is complete with this even more random reply....
Headline cut short (Score:5, Funny)
Rejected Scientific Paper Recycled as an Ad for Roland Piquepailles Blog
Re:Headline cut short (Score:2)
I should note that it was a joke , I don't begrude the editors or Mr Piquapaille for this . Slashdot and Piquepailles (gonna call him roland from now on , god thats a tricky name to type)blog are both comercial sites and as such this is how they garner revenue (Advertising).
I don't know if the rumours of Timothy pushing the blogs for financial gain are true or if it just so happens its a coincidence , It dosn't really matter to me.
If the story holds some intrest , then fair play if
Re:Headline cut short (Score:2)
Roland #1 [slashdot.org]
Roland #2 [slashdot.org]
Re:Headline cut short (Score:2)
I wouldnt care atall if they admited it and were open about the fact(if it is really hapening), i just dont like Ads which pretend to be factual information
Groklaw? (Score:2, Informative)
Googling on the name of the header image... (Score:2)
I dunno. Maybe it's a standard part of some webdesign tool kit?
Re:Googling on the name of the header image... (Score:2)
Re:Groklaw? (Score:2)
Re:Groklaw? (Score:2)
This is what Benny Peiser should do.. (Score:1)
Why didn't somebody think of it before?
On slashdot.... (Score:1)
Roland (Score:1, Insightful)
The most convincing argument that Roland Piquepaille is paying the Slashdot editors is that, at the time of writing, reading this story at +5 threshold, there are only three comments at +5, and all of them are complaining about him. The most recent Roland advertisments have all been the same. And yet the Slashdot editors continue to post his adverts.
Sweeping changes are due anyway (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that any paper that meets a journals criteria should be put online and any interested party can vote as to the merits of the piece. The best and most interesting papers will become featured and the worse will be put to the back of the que. Papers that are so far advanced that their merits aren't recognized for years will have the option of becoming featured when they meet a threshold of other papers citing them. Papers that become seminal can be bound once each year for more perminant archiving. Nothing is lost in this system and no paper is rejected because one or two reviewers are jealous or don't quite understand the authors intent.
Selection bias (Score:2)
Re:Ack! Roland strikes again. (Score:1, Funny)