Academic publishers should put their knowledge in the public domain.

Here's the thing, booji. Printing on to paper, even for a short run publication, is cheap. Storing what are often plane text files online is incredibly cheap - the Project Gutenberg organisation is funded by charitable donations,  but can afford to DVDs containing the text of some 30,000 out-of-copyright books. Quibbling over material production costs in the age of digital distribution and cheap e-readers will not help you in this argument.

Let's consider an alternative source of expense for journals - editing and peer review services. Peer reviewing- attempts to replicate experiments discussed in journal articles- is the meat and drink of most university science departments. Articles that review and dissect others findings are more common than original research in the world of academic publishing. Peer review receives funding in the same way as original research. In some instances, it may be difficult to draw a firm distinction between the two processes. Journals, therefore, do not need to sponsor peer review.

Editing services are a potential expense, but even here there is no need to hire a large number of specialists. The utility of the peer review process is partly based on its ability to pick up on technical errors and mistakes. A small number of sub editors and managing editors is usually sufficient to serve the needs of a typical journal. The salaries of these individuals certainly do not justify the $1.1 billion of profit made in 2011 by Elsevier, the largest academic publisher on the planet.

So how can academic publishers continue to justify the outrageous average fee of $30 that is charged to individuals attempting to access a scientific paper privately, instead of through an institution? As Ben Goldacre points out the in Guardian article that Alex Helling included above, this approach to the marketisation of knowledge is a significant barrier to furthering the public understanding of science, and can also leave many science students lacking a resource that is central to the continued development of their knowledge and skills once they have left their university or college.

The problem of private access, however, pales in comparison to the effect that journal pricing has on academic institutions in developing nations. The Economist notes that 65% of the content budget of an academic library will be spent on journal subscriptions (http://www.economist.com/node/18744177). This constitutes a huge expense to both public and private universities operating in countries where primary and secondary education are often priorities for funding and where transnational brain drains can lead to deficits in expertise.