Hi Maha, what I find interesting about peer journals is they seem each locked into a particular discipline putting a restriction on what they can cover. What of stuff that appears in-between disciplines? Speculative things? Young people with new ideas. To me, self appointed panels of “experts” are intrusive plus, who’s to say they are qualified to comment on qualifications they themselves don’t have?

Thing is, I don’t mind paying for the access to the unfamiliar or the workings of an admirable thinker. I bought a skinny little book on public relations that is more powerful and thought provoking than my whole PR library. Thinking about it, the value in new perspectives exceeded the cost and I wonder if this is where pay-wall journals really fail us. They don’t return any excitement, just confirm how dull most things said by people to prove themselves smart really are?