Why AI Will Not End Scholarly Publishing (and the Publish-or-Perish Institution) (nicolaijfoss.substack.com)

Thomas Manabu's essay, “The Machine Consumes Itself: Artificial Intelligence and the End of Publish-or-Perish,” presents a provocative argument that generative AI could dismantle the publish-or-perish culture in academia by reducing the scarcity of scholarly articles, thus undermining their value as academic currency. While the essay highlights valid concerns about the exploitation of publication metrics and the disruptive potential of AI in academic writing, its conclusion that the traditional publishing system will collapse is contentious. The author argues that although AI decreases the cost of producing manuscripts, it does not diminish the scarcity of genuine research insights or expertise, which are essential for establishing quality in scholarly work. Moreover, the essay overlooks the competitive dynamics inherent in academia. As AI enables researchers to increase manuscript output, the competition for limited academic positions and funding will likely intensify rather than diminish. This could lead to heightened performance expectations, reinforcing existing hierarchies in academic publishing. Rather than seeing a collapse of the current system, we may observe adaptations that emphasize the importance of journal reputation and institutional affiliation as credible signals of research quality amidst an abundance of AI-generated content. Ultimately, the dialogue around the impact of AI on scholarly publishing points to a need for thoughtful institutional design that balances innovation with the core values of academic rigor and reliability.