Accepted. Published.  

Words which still carry the weight of prestige for authors today that they did hundreds of years ago when research communication began.  

There should be another word which follows “published”. 

Accepted. Published. Shared.  

These three words speak to the core value publishers bring to scholarly communications: Quality assessment; dissemination; and community.  

These value-adds have traveled with academic publishing from 17th Century letters through to the mega journals of today. But they are currently under threat.  

A storm of transformational challenges affect our industry. Taking a step back we can see where we are in context: at a great turning point.  

 

In the beginning 

Journal publishing, in its earliest form, began as a grass-roots practice within academia for sharing knowledge. The first scholarly journal, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, was established as far back as 1665. For centuries, journal publishing largely remained a practice confined within the private academic community. 

In the 1950s a combination of social, cultural and political factors contributed to huge growth in research output. Universities migrated from places solely of education to seats of research. There was a second industrial revolution, as well as a parallel capitalist one. This led to the rise of the commercial publisher.  

Scholarly publishing became a powerhouse in the knowledge ecosystem, navigating the birth of the internet, the globalisation of research and the open science movement amongst other changes.  

 

The great turning point 

Today we find ourselves at a confluence of pressures.  

Generative AI brings with it a paradigm shift in how research is discovered, consumed and conducted.  

Research integrity concerns reach a crescendo and threaten to undermine one of our industry’s core value-adds: quality.  

The prestige economy that surrounds article publication has been quietly - and then not so quietly - exerting pressure on researchers, resulting in widespread dissatisfaction amongst academics. Meanwhile the politicisation of research output threatens the role of knowledge and expertise in serving the world around us.  

As was the case in the 1950s, 1990s and 2000s we find our industry being shaped as much by social, cultural and political forces as technological ones.  

When we look back years from now, it is likely we will view this time - from roughly 2020 to 2026 - as a great turning point.  

In response to this new reality publishers of all sizes have been slow to respond. This has left many wrestling with a fundamental question of viability: what is the future of scholarly communication, and are publishers in it? And which ones? 

 

The need for community never goes away, but it does shift. Publishers must move with it.  

The path forward requires a recommitment to the core value of publishing to research. I believe the key to navigating this turning point is to re-establish and deepen the relationship with the researcher community.  

Through the lens of the researcher, publishing is a service business. The core services publishers provide are quality assurance, dissemination, and, crucially, community.  

While attention is undeniably needed on the threats to dissemination posed by AI, the true opportunity lies in doubling down on the value of quality and community.  

The need for community never goes away, but it does shift in response to changing needs. So, where do publishers begin this vital journey of strengthening community?  

One answer is to start with the most stable and fundamental points of interaction. While reading patterns are being transformed, the submission, review, and production processes remain a core part of the researcher's workflow. This is a massive opportunity for publishers to improve the experience, engage with researchers, and add value at every stage. 

This is not a simple task. It requires investments in workflow and tooling. It means being more communicative and transparent. It means timely and efficient service.  

Other opportunities arise for publishers to address the unmet needs of their community. Early-career researchers, in particular, are under increasing pressure and often have knowledge gaps around opportunities like peer review and editorship. This presents a significant opportunity to engage and share knowledge. Society publishers have a strong advantage here.  

As for quality. I’m not yet convinced that quality as a moat will be fully eroded by LLM-driven tools. Yes, the commodification of content presents challenges for publishers in getting recognition for quality output. But the need for trustworthy, quality content isn’t going away, it’s just moving to a different end point: the LLM output as well as (or instead of) the journal article.  

 

On the other side of all threat lies opportunity 

While certainly a turbulent and destabilising time, this great turning point is an opportunity to cement value provision for researchers into the heart of the publishing business.  

Collaboration will be key to do this right. It will mean extensive collaboration with the communities publishers serve, with each other to share knowledge and with partners to enable the change needed.  

Rather than pointing us to a new approach for publishing, the great turning point is a return to publishing’s roots.  

 

About the author

Ravi Venkataramani, CEO of Kriyadocs

We created Kriyadocs with the vision to make publishing simpler and more efficient. Making the publishing journey a delightful experience for authors, reviewers, editors, and publishing teams is our top priority.

Visit Kriyadocs' Website