Apparently not, in light of the DOAJ’s recent experience.
Furthermore, it’s not just about whether authors are being fooled; it’s also about whether predatory publishers help authors to fool others.
At the other end of the importance spectrum, my colleague Phill Jones has also recently brought up the issue of predatory conferences, which I believe is very important–enough so that I think it merits a separate discussion. These are journals that falsely claim to offer to the reading public documents based on legitimate and dispassionate scientific or scholarly inquiry.Consider this hypothetical but realistic scenario, for example: an author is coming up for tenure review, and needs a few more peer-reviewed, high-impact journal publications on his list in order to be given serious consideration.This situation creates for the candidate an incentive to go with a deceptive or predatory pseudo-scholarly journal in the full knowledge that it is not legitimate, gambling that his tenure committee will not go to the trouble of researching the legitimacy of every journal on his publication list.(Are there other significant manifestations of deceptive publishing in the scholcomm space? The prospect of setting up a blacklist raises a number of difficult and important questions.Here are some of them, followed by my suggested answers: Focusing on the journal at the title level is probably the best general approach, since not every such journal is part of a suite of titles put forward by a publishing organization.