Elsevier Shuts Down Its Finance Journal Citation Cartel

It’s academic soap opera time: mega-publisher Elsevier quietly yanked 12 finance papers on Christmas Eve, all tied to one co-author, Brian M. Lucey. The stated reason? The editor made the final decision while also being a co-author — a huge conflict in plain English. These papers racked up 5,104 citations, and some landed in selective journals (acceptance rate = percent of submissions that get in), making the fallout even spicier. The internet lit up like a tree. One camp went full boycott: “Elsevier is rotten”, pointing at the company’s fat profits and taxpayer-funded access, with roflmaostc bragging they never review or publish with Elsevier. Another camp says don’t just blame the publisher — fire the authors and hold universities accountable, per BrenBarn. A third theme: this isn’t isolated; three journals were hit, hinting at a wider mess. The meme moment everyone latched onto? Lucey’s 56 papers in 2025 — “one every 6.5 days.” Speedrun academia. Meanwhile, grumbelbart2 dropped the uncomfortable truth: hiring and funding often worship publication counts, so gaming the system is practically the rules. Side drama spilled into biotech vs academia value-add, with CraftingLinks clapping back that taking research to market is not a “thin layer.” Bottom line: the community is raging at the publish-or-perish machine — and wondering who, if anyone, will actually pay a price.