[1999, the year of fired editors-in-chief]

Abstract

In the past year three editors of medical scientific journals stepped back, a remarkable fact for a relatively quiet profession. G. Lundberg was dismissed. J. Kassirer was forced out and F. Meijman resigned. There are differences and similarities in these events. Lundberg of The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) was dismissed because of his interference with regular points of view of the board of the American Medical Association, whereas Kassirer of The New England Journal of Medicine was forced out mainly because of his refusal to allow use of the name and reputation of his journal for other medical and lay publications by the Massachusetts Medical Association; Meijman resigned because he disagreed with the changes in the scientific contents of Huisarts en Wetenschap (General Practitioner and Medical Science) proposed by the board of the general practitioners' association that owns the journal. The similarity is that editorial freedom appears to be a relative concept. Owners, whether societies or publishers, can fire displeasing editors or force them to leave. The consequences could be harmful, to the owners, but especially to the journals, because of loss of impact, credibility and trust by authors, reviewers and readers. The only basis for a constructive co-operation between owners and editors is mutual trust. Immediate firing of editors is not possible at the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde (Dutch Journal of Medicine). The association that owns the journal consists of (former) members of the editorial board. A committee of the association assesses every year the editorial decisions and policies retrospectively. Subsequently the editors may be reappointed for another year by a vote of the general assembly of the association. If they are not reappointed, an administrative procedure will be initiated to terminate their contract.