Just over 5 years ago, I decided I would no longer peer review for or publish with Elsevier. In addition, I would try not to support any of their products. This was a choice enabling me to be more consistent with my own ethical values and support of open science.
This is was a difficult decision to make, because for-profit publishing companies have all engaged in questionable behaviors in pursuing economic gains. Also, it means saying ‘no’ to colleagues who are editors and could really use my expertise for a peer review or book chapter contribution. Therefore, I have created a brief letter template to decline such offers. It provides some informative links, encourages the recipient to pursue their own opinion and avoids overreaction via defamation or fear-mongering. Elsevier is known to attack with lawyers, so it is also important that I protect myself and my associates when declining such offers.
Dear [person],
I apologize but I cannot in good faith [write a peer review / book chapter] for an Elsevier publication.
I realize that publishers are ‘for profit’ enterprises, and balance the needs of science with their own pursuit of economic success; however, in my experience Elsevier has consistently proven to be an exceptionally unethical company with practices antithetical to the pursuit of knowledge. Some of the more awful practices have been to sponsor arms fairs[1], advocate intensively against open access[2], create seemingly scientific journals and then sell space in those journals for companies to print bogus articles that support their products[3], purchase and copyright or paywall scientific tools[4], charge astronomical fees for journal subscriptions[5], and over-harvest my personal information[6]. Therefore, if I can help it, I do not peer review or publish with Elsevier anymore.
Please do not take this personally. This letter expresses my own personal opinion based on my own experiences. My opinion and resulting preferences do not reflect that of my employer or any colleagues with whom I have collaborated. I encourage you and each person to investigate for profit publishers on their own and make their own informed decisions.
Sicerely,
[Author]
[1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)60488-7/fulltext
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier#Criticism_of_academic_practices, https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2018/jun/29/elsevier-are-corrupting-open-science-in-europe, https://www.lub.lu.se/en/find/lubsearch/epublications/new-agreement-elsevier/sweden-stands-open-access-cancels-agreement-elsevier (attacks on ResearchGate and Sci-Hub) https://www.science.org/content/article/publishers-take-researchgate-court-alleging-massive-copyright-infringement, https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2017.22196
[3] https://www.the-scientist.com/elsevier-published-6-fake-journals-44160, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)61404-5/fulltext
[4] Social Science Research Network – purchased and turned into a place for paywalls; Mendeley – purchased and converted into a product that is not (easily) interoperable with open source products like Zotero; tries to patent a peer review tool to a payment step into the scientific process https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/08/stupid-patent-month-elsevier-patents-online-peer-review.
[5] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/california-tells-elsevier-take-hike, https://www.thenation.com/article/society/neuroimage-elsevier-editorial-board-journal-profit
[6] https://eiko-fried.com/welcome-to-hotel-elsevier-you-can-check-out-any-time-you-like-not/

