Dear Editor:
The February issue of Perspectives noted two instances of substantial changes in manuscripts by editors of professional journals, which the authors did not agree with. One journal published the copy despite the author’s wish that it not do so; in the other case, the author was not permitted to see proofs before publication.
The Professional Division felt that the grievances were “serious,” but said there was little it could do, since the stage of mediation had passed. Could it not have mentioned in its report the names of the offending journals, offering the editors’ responses to these charges if appropriate? Then others could decide for themselves whether or not they should submit material to these journals.
John H. Cary
Cleveland State University
