Academic Publishing Eating Itself?

A peer-reviewed study published earlier this year used a single word to describe what’s happening to academic publishing.

Enshittification.

It’s the same pattern that hollowed out social media, e-commerce, and search engines. Platforms that once served their users gradually shifted toward extracting value from them instead. Quality declined. Profit became the priority. And people stayed because leaving meant losing everything.

The study found the same five-stage spiral playing out inside scholarly publishing.

Retractions crossed 10,000 in a single year. Predatory journals grew from 10,000 to over 18,000 in less than a decade. Peer review is under pressure in ways that weren’t visible five years ago.

None of this means the research that matters isn’t getting done. It is. But it does mean the environment researchers are submitting to has changed significantly, and navigating it without understanding what’s happening puts years of work at unnecessary risk.

This month’s Manuscriptedit newsletter breaks it all down. The five stages, the numbers, what it means for researchers submitting right now, and where this might be heading.

If you’re a researcher, a PhD student, or anyone working inside academic publishing this one is worth a read.

Read the Full Edition Here — https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/academic-publishing-eating-itself-manuscriptedit-xbztc