Predatory journals undermining PhD by publication route

By saying that "What I would say as the indicia is, ‘If anyone asks you to pay for publishing in their journal, get out now!’” Professor Barnett seems to show that she doesn't understand Open Access publishing. These routinely, and legitimately, ask for an Article Processing Charge (APC). That's how they fund themselves while making their content available to all. Predatory publishing is now a huge and difficult problem that needs serious addressing, but identifying journals as predatory, or not, is a far more involved process than suggested.

If payment is what indicates that a journal is predatory then we are losing it. There are journals that subject articles to rigorous peer review but at the end of the day demand APC since their articles are free to access. Inasmuch as we have journals that do not meet the required standards, we should not yield to pressure from highly commercialistic journals listed in high-end sites to label 'all' open access journals as predatory.

There needs to be a clear scientific consensus on what makes a journal predatory. We have seen instances in the past of journals 'influencing' Universities to 'silence' certain academics who raised legitimate questions about journal intent and methods. And then, there are journals who employ devious tactics to get established academics to join their editorial boards in lieu of certain favours. And finally, there are journals that have been established for the sole purpose of making quick $$$ by promising rapid publication often with no peer-review at all. Academic publishing is a constantly evolving process and one that needs diligent involvement and meticulous management. You can almost be certain that predatory journals will always attempt to game the system.