Patron – Predatory Journals and Conferences

August 2, 2024August 25, 2024

How we are funded

We are often asked who funds us? For example, UKSG responded to one of out tweets, asking “When will you be more open about who you are and who is funding you (if anyone, indeed). Just out of interest.“

Our response to that tweet was

“Yes we will [be more open], please see x.com/fake_journals/. We are just making the final preparations. Also, there is one paper accepted, and been through the final proof stage (we are done with it, it is with the journal now) and we’d like that paper to be available online before we go public as we feel that it is important. Please bear with us for just a little longer.“

We have always planned to be more open and transparent, and always – from day one – said that when we reached 10,000 X (Twitter) followers we would reveal who we are. We have now reached that number, so will explain about our finances – slightly ahead of going public, which we plan to do on 17th August 2024.

So, what costs do we have?

Here are the major costs that are associated with running this Twitter account and the accompanying web site. We won’t give exact figures as i) they change over time, ii) the aim is not to provide a full financial statement but, rather, provide information about the costs we have incurred for the past six years, and will continue to incur.

We have the domain costs for the web site (http://www.predatory-publishing.com). The domain has been active for about six years and we recently renewed it for a further few years. If you have ever registered a web domain you’ll be familiar with the costs involved but we are talking several hundred dollars.
We do subscribe to a number of services to support our web site. For example, we use Elementor
as our web site builder. We could have gone with a free option, but we wanted to take advantage of some of the paid for features. We also use a #PHP plugin that enables us to provide more dynamic content. For example, when we display lists of publications, this is being serviced via PHP, as it would be difficult (at least for us) using raw WordPress, if not impossible.
We have a “blue tick” X (Twitter) account, which we have to pay for. We decided to go for the blue tick option not really for the blue tick (it’s nice, but does not mean what it used to mean) but mainly so that we could post longer content – such as this. We are glad we went down this route as many of our most popular posts exceed the standard 280 character limit.
You may notice that we post regularly. To do this, we utilize a queueing app. We favour Buffer, as it is what we know and we are familiar with the way it works. We are currently on their legacy plan but are thinking of upgrading as it provides more functionality but (surprise) it is more expensive. The one hesitation we have (apart from the cost) is that fact that Buffer has an API, which they stopped making available to new subscribers a few years ago unless you were an existing user (which we were). We have asked if we upgrade, will we still be able to use the API – they have said yes, but we are still hesitant as using the API is an important element of our workflow.
We are NOT graphic designers but we do recognize the importance of images when posting (and video, but we have not even considered that yet). To support our (very limited) capabilities in designing graphics we subscribe to Adobe’s Creative Cloud. This gives us access to tools such as Photoshop. Okay, we could use a variety of free tools but we know Adobe’s tools and use them in other parts of our lives, so we bite the bullet and subscribe. Not all the costs of Creative Cloud can be attributed to this X account and our web site but it is probably what we use these tools for the most.
Our time: We probably spend (on average) two hours a day on this Twitter account and the accompanying web site. This is obviously a cost to us, but we do not recoup these costs.

Income

We set up a Patreon account (and regularly post about it on our Twitter feed) a couple of years ago. You can see it here: patreon.com/predatorypubli

In the time Patreon has been running it has generated about USD $170. We are very appreciative to those that have supported us via Patreon. This is an area we would like to further develop as we do not think we are doing a very good job of offering the right incentives. If you have any ideas/thoughts, we would be glad to hear from you.

We have also experimented with display ads on our web site. We have mixed feelings as, in our view, it really detracts from the look/feel on the web site. At its high we were getting about USD $25 dollars a month. We have taken off many of the ad placement places and we are down to about USD $2 a month (yes, a month, NOT a day). It is almost not worth doing and are thinking of removing display ads completely. Since we started experimenting with display ads, we have raised about USD $350 (over a 2-3 years).

So, who else funds you?

The short answer is nobody. Everything we have done so far, we have funded ourselves. Indeed, the Patreon and display ad funds, still sit in those accounts. We have not drawn on those funds yet.

The future

We would like to make this initiative at least sustainable. We have a few plans/ideas that we’ll share in due course.

Finally

We are very grateful to our patrons and to all those that have supported us (albeit unknowingly) when they click on a display ad. But. it’s not all about the finances. We have received fantastic support from the community, in a variety of ways. It has to be said though that we have also received some negativity (which is one the primary reasons why we did not go public from day one), but generally we have felt support from the community. Thank you to everybody who has supported us and we look forward to the next few years with excitement.

September 3, 2022January 21, 2023

Reflecting on the publishers we have featured

On our Twitter feed, we have a number of themes, such as EMAIL Snippets and Soundbites from articles.

We have also started to look at various publishers, with the emphasis on publishers, as there are too many journals and, it is probably the case that if a publisher is publishing a predatory journal, then all the journals they publish are all likely to be predatory. No guarantee that this is the case, but it is not a bad working assumption.

Publishers (and others) we have looked at

This is a list of publishers, and one journal, we have looked so far. We note that one of them is not a publisher or a journal, but a bibliographic database.

Scope Database: You can see the tweets here.
Walsh Medical Media: You can see the tweets here.
Remedy Publications: You can see the tweets here.
Allied Academies: You can see the tweets here.
ECronicon: You can see the tweets here.
Scientific Reports: You can see the tweets here.
Mega Journal of Oncology: You can see the tweets here.
International Journal of Engineering Research and Development: You can see the tweets here.

Self-reflection

We have been tweeting about publishers, and others, for a while now. We believe that it does give insight into how the publishers, and their journals, operate.

If we were critical of ourselves, and self-reflection is always good, we have adopted an approach where we have tweeted about anything we have found that is interesting. That is not, necessarily, a bad thing but we do not have a coherent set of information about each publisher that enables a comparison to be made between different publishers.

Going forward

Looking at the publishers that we listed above, we have (we believe) drawn out some insights, but it is not easy to look at our Twitter feed and to compare one publisher against another, or even to get an overview of that individual publisher.

To address this, we plan to be a lot more methodical in the future. By that, we mean that we will try and collect similar information about a given publisher before looking at some of the more unique elements of that publisher.

Once we have collated all the data for a given publisher we will collate it into a single document. We will make that document available to our patrons and also try and publish the document so that it is available to a wider audience.

At some point, we will revisit some, perhaps all, of the publishers listed about. We have also started to identify some other publishers that we will take a look at. We will share these in a later post and we will also be asking for suggestions from the community.

If you would like to support our work as a patron, please take a look at this article, which will give provide you with all the information you need. It will not only give you access to the reports that we will produce, ahead of anybody else receiving them, but there are other benefits which are outlined in the article referred to above.

January 7, 2022January 8, 2022

How we can help (or not) with your predatory publishing questions

We often get requests for help, including (but not limited to):

“Is [put in a journal name] predatory?“
“How can I stop the emails from predatory journals?“
“Can you help my research project?“
“Can you give me all the data you have?“
“Can I have your complete list of predatory journals/publishers“
“I am being harassed for payment, what should I do?“
…and many more.

We appreciate the interaction that we receive and we would love to provide a bespoke service to anybody that asks for it, but that is just not possible. In fact we even struggle to respond to all emails, Twitter direct messages and the other ways that people communicate with us.

If you want our help on predatory publishing related issues there are various ways we try to do this. This article provides details of how we can assist you and, in many cases, why we cannot. We also hope to provide some pointers as to what you can do if you have one of the more common questions, without having to rely on us.

Below, we discuss some of the common questions we get and explain why we cannot always respond in the way you might expect/need. We also suggest ways that you might be able to answer the questions you have yourself.

We also provide some information about what we do with the communications messages that we receive.

EMAIL is not the best way to contact us

We have an email address (admin@predatory-publishing.com). This is our generic email address and anybody can send us an email using that address.

The majority of emails we receive are spam emails that have been forwarded to us. These form the basis for our Twitter feed dedicated to snippets from emails that highlight (we hope in a generally amusing way) the ways that predatory publishers try to entice you to submit a paper. You can some examples of these snippets here.

In among all these spam emails are emails that ask us for help, some examples which have been given in our introductory remarks. The problem we have is two-fold:

We do not check our email account very often (perhaps every two weeks, maybe even less). This is by design as we want to focus our efforts on our Twitter account and our blog, rather than continually checking (and responding) to emails.
If we do get an email that says something like “Is [insert journal name] predatory?“, and we do get emails exactly like this, there is a huge amount of work for us to do a proper analysis and report our findings. We are also cautious about stating whether a journal is predatory or not, as this is what got Jeffery Beall into so much trouble.

We discuss topic this in more detail below.

Access to our data

A frequent request we get (either by email or Twitter Direct message) is access to all of our data. We are not really in a position to do this, for the reasons we give below.

Can you give me a list of predatory journals?

This is a common question, but we do not really store any data about journals, perhaps we should but we don’t.

If anything all the data we have, in this regard, is on our blog and our Twitter account, albeit in a very unstructured form. You are welcome to use that for any projects that you are undertaking.

We have considered trying to structure that data but it is difficult to know what to collect, how to store it and how we make it available. In any case, with the number of predatory journals in the thousands, we could only scratch the surface and, at the moment, there are better sources of this information such as Cabells (albeit a paid for service) and the original, and variants, of Beall’s List.

In the future we may try and compile a list of journals, with some indicators whether they are predatory or not, but this is a huge undertaking.

Can you provide the soundbite data?

We have been asked for a complete list of the Soundbites that we tweets about. We cannot simply give this data away as it takes us a long time to compile and, as far as we know, we are the only people that do that, at least for predatory publishing.

Each paper that we produce soundbites for probably takes (at least) 4-5 hours. At the time of writing (8 Jan 2022) we have produced soundbites for 42 papers, which have a total of 2,192 individual soundbites. This is an investment on our part of about 200 hours, or about 4 weeks work. That does not count the initial work in developing the platform (database, Twitter functionality etc.) that enables us to post them.

We have no plans to monetize this data, not even sure who we could, but we may find other uses for it which may not be possible it it were effectively in the public domain. For example, we may write a journal article at some point. Not sure what form this would take, or whether this is even a contribution to be made, but we would like to keep our options open.

Can you provide the EMAIL snippet data?

We have been asked for a complete list of the email snippets that we tweet. These snippets are drawn from emails we have received ourselves and from those that have either been forwarded to us, or have been tweeted, tagging us.

At the time of writing (8 Jan 2022) we have just over 700 email snippets in our database, with about 500 emails that people have kindly forwarded us that we still need to process.

We could make this dataset available to interested parties but the snippets have taken us a long time to collect, and process, and they are a ‘Unique Selling Point’ of our Twitter feed. It we gave the data to somebody else, we have to assume that it is now in the public domain and others could easily replicate what we are doing.

We may also write a journal article at some point. drawing on these emails (sentiment analysis?). Not sure what form this would take, or whether there is even a contribution to be made, but we would like to keep our options open.

Where do you get your images from?

This is an easier question to answer, and help with.

We use images a lot, on feeds such as our soundbites, email snippets and articles on predatory publishing.

Most of these are from services where you can get images for free. They provide exceptional images by really talented photographers. The services we most often use are.

If you are looking for images, we highly recommend these photographic services.

You may note that we credit the images that we use, so if you want to see/use the same image then you should be able to easily find it.

Some of the photographs we have taken ourselves. Not many to be honest but we hope to increase the number of images that we produce in the future. If you would like to contribute any images, please let us know.

Why can't I comment on your blog posts

You may have noticed, we know some people have, that you cannot comment on our blog posts. This is a conscious decision on our part, for the following reasons.

Blog posts attract spam and although there are tools to control it, these tools cannot capture all spam and it still requires some work to look regularly at each post to see if the comments are valid.
As well as capturing spam, valid comments could be marked as spam, which means we have to mark them as valid, which all takes time.
We could moderate all comments, but this takes time which, frankly we do not have.
Predatory publishing is a controversial topic and is likely to attract views which not everybody agrees with. This could lead to a lot of confrontation, which means that we may to act as a mediator, which is not a role we want to play.

So, rightly or wrongly, we have decided not to allow comments on our posts. We may change this in the future but we would need, we believe, a dedicated moderator who is able to manage the various comments and even respond on our behalf.

If you supported us a patron, it may help us move forward on having even more interaction with the community.

What about comments on Twitter

Earlier we said that we do not allow comments on our blog posts, giving the reasons why. It is a natural question to ask, “So what about comments on Twitter?” We would respond as follows.

We don’t believe that we can stop comments on Twitter. If somebody comments, we can delete it (we have never done this (as as 8 Jan 2022)) but cannot stop people making that comment in the first place.
When people comment on Twitter, you know their Twitter handle, so you have some information who is making the comment. Commenting on blog posts is a lot easier to hide your identity. It’s not impossible on Twitter but more difficult.
We often tag people/publishers, even predatory publishers, and we have not yet had a war of words on a Tweet. Sometimes, we wish we would, to further raise the profile of predatory publishing, but this has not happened yet.

So, for all these reasons, we are happy (at the moment) to allow comments on our tweets, without having to moderate them.

How can we actually help?

The above may sound as if we cannot help, or are reluctant to do so. This is not the case and we provide some ways that we can help. In doing so, we try to help as many people as possible, even if just one person reached out to us.

Ask the community

We are not the only experts on predatory publishing, indeed we would not even classify ourselves as experts. There are many other people and organisations out there who are much more expert than ourselves.

Reach out to them. If you want to ask a question, tag us on Twitter (using @fake_journals) and we’ll respond (if we can), retweet it, tag people who we think might be able to help etc.

We are also thinking of setting up a Forum, but this requires time and other resources. This is one way that you could help us by becoming a patron (see below).

Is this journal a predatory journal?

This is the question we get asked the most.

We look at the obvious things such as editorial board, claims of impact factors that are not true, Article Processing Charges (APCs) which are not easy to find, look/feel of the web site, how submissions are made (email or some other system), how regularly the journal publishes, are there any statistics on time from submission to publication etc. and we try and respond to the person that asked the question.

We nearly always ask what the view of the person is who asked the question. Almost invariably, they do not have a view which suggests to us (perhaps unfairly) that they have fired off a quick email, rather than carrying out any background checks themselves.

We do make a note of the journal and may investigate it later but, generally, we do not discuss specific journals on our blog. We realize that the audience is limited if we report on a given journal and the effort involved in doing a full analysis probably does not give a return on investment for either us or the readership of the blog.

We have written some more general articles and you might want to take a look at these:

You might also want to look at a specific article we wrote titled Is this a legitimate journal? How we respond

The best advice we can give you is to do some cursory checks yourself, and ask trusted (perhaps more experienced colleagues) and if there are any doubts about the journal just look for another one.

Is this publisher a predatory journal?

This is a similar question to asking if a journal is predatory, but it is a much better question as the answer provides much more information.

To answer this question means looking at a lot of journals, as many as possible, from a given publisher. The more you can identify as predatory, means that your overall conclusion will be stronger. It is probably true to say that if a publisher publishes one predatory journal, then the other journals it publishes are also predatory.

However, frustratingly, this is not always the case. There are some publishers that, arguably, publish some predatory journals and some journals which are not considered predatory. There is an argument that these publishers started off as predatory and are now trying to become legitimate by transitioning their journals.

There is an interesting 2021 article:

Journal citation reports and the definition of a predatory journal: The case of the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

with a response from the publisher:

Comment on: ‘Journal citation reports and the definition of a predatory journal: The case of the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)’ from Oviedo-García

which demonstrates the issues around identifying, and validating predatory publishers/journals.

If you have doubts about a publishers, the best advice we can give you is to do some checks yourself. You need to understand why you want to ask about a particular publisher as it will not be the same as asking about a journal (which typically is because you are thinking of submitting a paper).

As an example, we have collected a lot of journal data from a publisher’s web site so that we could analyze it for a journal article. This is a different question to asking about a single journal.

With regard to our future plans, if we were ever going to produce a list of predatory journals, we would probably do it at the publisher level, rather than at the level of individual journals.

Can you help with a research project?

This is not a frequent question but we have had a couple of requests to participate in research projects. This could mean participating in a survey or providing data to help support the research.

We invariably decline (sorry). This is for several reasons.

The main reason is that we are currently remaining anonymous. We have stated that we will reveal who we are once we reach 10,000 Twitter followers. This is an arbitrary figure but we have set it at that figure, as we had to choose some way of deciding when we would make it known who we are and we decided on 10,000 followers.

Why did we do this? Essentially, its due to the problems that Jeffrey Beall had and we hope to avoid that by being anonymous until we have some traction and, we hope, some validation from the community.

Aligned with that we are also cautious about definitely labeling journals as being predatory. We want to show an evidence based approach along with just reporting facts.

Anyway, we digress. Another reason why we decline to participate in research projects is simply lack of time. We not only have to maintain this web site, keep the Twitter feed topped up and develop new content. We also have day jobs and our own research to do.

If you want help with a research project, then we are probably not the people to ask, at least not at the moment. This might change in the future but for now we are likely to politely decline and we hope you can understand, and appreciate, why we have to say this.

There is a way to get our attention

We hope that our blog and Twitter account helps you, even if we are unable to give an individual service that some might find useful.

Please do not stop contacting us as we do read every comment, request and question even if we cannot respond individually.

There is one way to get our attention and to get an individual response. That is by becoming a patron.

If you are able to support us, you can access the services we only provide to our patrons. For example, each month you can ask us to carry out a journal or publisher review. This will be done for you and we will send it to you before we use it for any other purposes.

We will also send you a newsletter and give you advance information about some of the the things we have planned.

Of course, if you support us, then this is of great benefit to us. We can use your support to progress some of the projects which are only ideas at the moment.

If you can afford a small contribution each month, then please consider becoming a patron. If that is not possible, we fully understand and we hope that the services that we do provide are still of use to you.

Final Remarks

We hope that you find the above information useful and we will update it as our situation changes and we are able to provide more information and/or services.

The other reason we wrote this article is so that we can point people to it who ask for our help so that, perhaps, they can find a way to access the information that they require and, at least, understand why we cannot provide the personal service that they were looking for.

August 15, 2021August 15, 2021

Support us by becoming a patron

Cutting to the chase

If you do not have the time, or the inclination to read all of this article, the take home message is that we are asking you to consider becoming a patron in order to support our work.

You can see more details by going directly to our Patreon page.

PLEASE NOTE: Whenever you decide to support us, you will be charged for the full amount for that month. This is the way Patreon works, at least for the way we have joined the scheme.

So, if you join on the 15th of the month you will be charged the full amount for that month and then charged again on the 1st of the following month. We are unable to provide refunds, or accept part payment for the month you start supporting us. If you want to avoid this (although you can still access all the services offered in that month), we suggest that you join us at the start of a month, so that you get the full benefit for that month.

Background

Our Predatory Publishing Twitter account has been running for about two years. At the time of writing (15 Aug 2021) we have tweeted almost 21,000 times, ranging from EMAIL snippets from (probably) predatory journals, quotes from papers on predatory publishing, looking at common terms and highlighting journals/publishers that you might want to be wary of. We also use our Twitter account to promote our blog.

Our blog has been running for a similar amount of time and we have published around 50 articles. We would like to publish many more. We have lots of ideas but there are always time pressures and writing a blog posts takes quite a lot of time.

Our web site also supports our Twitter account and blog. We hope to develop the web site in the future to provide even more information.

Thank you

We have been delighted with the level of engagement we have received since we started this initiative.

We do track some metrics, albeit in an ad-hoc way, and it shows a general increase in interaction since we started our Twitter and blog.

We are indebted to all those that have supported us. Thank you.

Controversy

We recognize that we are tackling a very controversial area, where others before us have faced significant difficulties. This is the reason why we are, at the moment, remaining anonymous. Once we have the trust of the scientific community and some traction, we will be more transparent about who is behind this initiative. The target we have set ourselves in 10,000 Twitter followers but we do review this as a goal from time to time but, at the moment, this is still out goal. At the time of writing we are about 37% towards that goal.

"Can you help/advise me, or do you have a view?"

As we have gained more exposure and traction, we are often asked questions, or for our views, about journals and publishers. Although we respond, we often have to say that “we will add it to our ever growing list and will look at the journal/publisher when time allows.“

We do work through that list but it is a little ad-hoc and, to be honest, we choose the ones that we think are most interesting. It might be useful if we had a way of prioritizing the journals/publishers that we look at.

What are our plans?

With your help, we hope that we can develop this platform even further and do more than we are doing at the moment.

We have the following ideas that, with your help, we can progress.

We are asking our patrons (see below) to request reviews of journals and publishers, this will not only make the content we produce more relevant but it will also provide a constant source of content that we hope our supporters will find interesting.
As we develop our database of journals and publishers, we will compile a searchable database so that others can find out about the journals and publishers that we have investigated.
The number of blog posts we can produce at the moment is limited, due to time limitations and other calls on our time. If our patrons are keen to write about predatory journals (see below), this would not only add additional blog posts but also give a different perspective, rather than just hearing our views all of the time.
We are considering starting a YouTube channel that focuses on Predatory Publishing, but this is not possible at the moment. We are keeping this idea on the “nice to do” list, but we need more time and/or support to be able to progress.
We would like to develop some short courses, so that scholars can have a more structured way to learn about predatory publishers, enabling them to avoid the pit falls. Like the YouTube channel, we require more time/support.
We have reported on several occasions sting operations against predatory journals. We believe that this is an effective way to highlight those journals that are operating in a predatory way. We would like to have a sustained way of testing suspected journals, rather than just having one off examples. That said, we must be careful not to waste the time of legitimate journals.
We would like to publish peer reviewed papers, in (obviously) non-predatory journals that record the results of our findings. If others are willing we would be delighted to co-author papers with like minded researchers.
Given the data and knowledge that we have accumulated during our journey, we would like to publish a book that provides the history of predatory publishing, the state of predatory publish at the present time and what can be done about it going forward. This will be a longer term project but the first stage is to find potential co-authors and then develop a proposal for a suitable publisher.
For those of you that follow our Twitter account, you will see that we tweet on various topics, such as EMAIL snippets from (probably) predatory journals and quotes from papers on predatory publishing. Some of you may have noticed that these tweets follow a similar layout and the reason that we are able to tweet so regularly is because we have automated much of the processes behind these tweets. It is not really to do with predatory publishing but we are thinking about sharing some of the ways we do this, perhaps on a different platform.

Our longer term plans include working with research institutes to provide a more bespoke service that we can offer at the moment.

Become a Patron

We would like to invite those that are interested in our work to become one of our patrons.

This will support us financially, which will enable us to do even more but, importantly, it will also enable us to be more targeted in areas that are of direct interest to the community.

We will also be able to engage with our patrons in a more meaningful way, especially those who, like us, want to eliminate predatory publishing and fake journals.

If you would like to be come a patron, please use this link and below we outline the various levels at which you can support us.

PLEASE NOTE: Whenever you decide to support us, you will be charged for the full amount for that month. This is the way Patreon works, at least for the way we have joined the scheme.

1. Supporter

You will receive a monthly newsletter, that contains information that is either exclusive to our patrons or is provided ahead of time of being published on our other platforms. We will also use you as a sounding board for some of the ideas that we have.

2. Contributor

If you are interested in predatory/fake publishing and/or want to get some experience in writing/blogging, we would welcome one blog post a month from you. This will be published on our blog site (subject to editorial controls). We will help you to get the blog post as good as it can be so that it is a credit to you and us.

3. Journal Review

In each calendar month, you can request a review of a specific journal. We will provide some key data points (assuming the data is available). We will try to include:

Whether the journal is recognized, or a member of, organizations such as ISSN, COPE, DOAJ and Scopus.
Where the journal is located?
How long it has been operating?
How many articles have been published?
Whether it is an open access journal.
What are its Article Processing Charges (APCs)?

We will also provide our thoughts/comments as we carry out the investigation.

We will share this review on our blog site, so as to help others, but we will delay that post for at least a month so that you have the information before anybody else.

4. Publisher Review

In each calendar month, you can request a review of a specific publisher. We will provide key data points (assuming the data is available). We will try to include the following:

How many journals the publisher has in their portfolio?
Where the publisher is located?
How long they have been operating?
Whether they are indexed/members of organisations such as ISSN, COPE, DOAJ and Scopus?
Whether they are only an open access publisher.

We will also provide our thoughts/comments as we carry out the investigation.

We are happy for you to request a review of a journal, rather than a publisher.

We will share this review on our blog site, in order to help others, but we will delay that post for at least a month so that you have the information before anybody else

5. Multiple Journal Reviews

This level of support provides the same as an individual journal review, but you can request up to four journal reviews in any calendar month. This provides one review free of charge when compared to the single journal review option.

6. Multiple Publisher Reviews

This level of support provides the same as an individual publisher review, but you can request up to four publisher reviews in any calendar month. This provides one review free of charge when compared to the single publisher review option.

7. Premium Supporter

This provides access to all of our other services. You will receive our newsletter, you can write a blog post each month and you can request both journal/publisher reviews, up to 10 in a calendar month, split across journal and publishers, whichever best meets your requirements.

As a premium supporter we will also provide you the other reviews that we have done at least a week before we publish them on our blog and/or web site, so that you get to see them before others (expect those that requested the review – they will get them first).

"I can't provide financial support at the moment"

We welcome any help that people can afford but if you cannot help at the present time (for whatever reason) no problem.

We hope that you will stay engaged and help us say spreading the word so that others can see what we are doing.