Ansh Bhatnagar, [writing for *Tribune*](, the revived magazine of the British left:

> Scientific knowledge doesn’t just need to be free to read – it needs to be owned and democratically controlled by the society it is meant to benefit. Publicly owned scientific publishing is the way to do that.

It's a good [piece](, grounded in the view that scholarship and profit are in irredeemable conflict. Still, the idea of "public ownership" is, at best, ambiguous—elsewhere in the [article]( Bhatnagar seems to refer to public *funding* paired with ownership and governance by the academic community. That sounds right—direct state ownership less so.