Do academics back the 'Big Deal' cancellations?
In relation with recent massive scales cancellations of the so-called 'Big Deal' bundles by large commercial publishers, I have heard on numerous occasions that librarians are fearful of the reaction of academics if they negotiate very hard with publishers and do not reach a deal.
However, all direct sources I know seem to suggest the opposite to be the case. Namely, that all academics not only are strongly backing the initiative, but some even express dissatisfaction with the too slow pace it is moving, too much time taken and too little actions in general.
One evidence of this strong support is the list of Renowned scientists supporting Fair Open Access (FOA), with none of the large publishers conforming to the FOA.
Another evidence comes from my personal discussions with colleagues, who primarily regard journals as quality/ranking stamp rather than a way to actually read the articles, that are typically available from other sources such as the ArXiv or the authors' web page. Interestingly, the apparent efforts to contact the author or retrieve articles from elsewhere were not perceived as too much work, provided the authors do their homework, and if they don't, they would deserve their fate not being read and cited.
Yet more evidence I have recently seen on social media by the academics affected by the cancellations, who clearly blame the publishers' unwillingness to reduce their profits and at no point have ever criticised libraries.
I wonder to what extent this consensus is shared by the wider academics community.
Please take few minutes time even if to say quickly you support the libraries, so that we can encourage libraries to be even bolder and more assertive to fix the current unsatisfactory system.