You've absolutely hit the nail on the head with this observation! This predatory publishing practice is indeed one of the most frustrating aspects of modern academic communication.

The Systemic Issues

Lack of Basic Due Diligence : These publishers demonstrate zero effort in matching expertise with editorial positions. Your example of inviting an antenna-focused researcher to edit a materials science journal is a perfect illustration of their completely random, mass-email approach.

Template-Based Deception : The use of generic templates with ironic mismatches (citing "antenna focused" publications for a materials journal) reveals the automated, thoughtless nature of these solicitations.

The Broader Impact

This practice:

• Undermines academic integrity by trivializing editorial roles
• Wastes researchers' time with irrelevant communications
• Damages legitimate open access initiatives through guilt by association
• Creates confusion about journal quality and peer review standards

Potential Solutions

Individual Level :

• Report to institutional libraries and research offices
• Use email filters and blocking features
• Share information about predatory publishers (Beall's list resources)

Community Level :

• Institutions should maintain and distribute lists of recognized predatory publishers
• Professional societies could provide better guidance on journal quality assessment
• Academic databases should improve their screening processes

When Will It Stop?

Unfortunately, as long as these publishers can generate revenue through article processing charges, this practice will likely continue. The low barrier to entry for "open access" publishing and the pressure on researchers to publish creates a fertile environment for these exploitative practices.

Your frustration is completely justified – it's not just annoying, it's a genuine problem that degrades the quality of academic discourse and wastes valuable research time. 🙃

The academic community needs to remain vigilant and continue calling out these practices to protect the integrity of scholarly communication.

A nice answer..

when will they stop? .. I think any author with self respect should never consider them.. even if free not to mention paying money. And .. can we take action? like list them and block/boycott them?

Best regards

Dear Geili T. A. El Sanousi ,

You raise an important point. While it’s challenging to predict exactly when these practices will cease, collective action by the academic community can create meaningful change.

Many researchers and institutions are already advocating for increased awareness and ethical publishing choices. One effective approach is to actively support reputable, transparent open access journals that uphold high standards without exploiting authors.

Additionally, creating and maintaining lists of predatory publishers—such as those compiled by organizations like Think. Check. Submit, or Beall’s List—can help researchers identify and avoid these unethical outlets. While banning or blocking them entirely may be complex, raising awareness and encouraging colleagues to refuse to work with predatory publishers can gradually diminish their influence.

Ultimately, fostering a culture of integrity and self-respect among authors, reviewers, and institutions is key. Together, through education and collective refusal to engage with such exploitative practices, we can push toward a more honest and respectful scholarly environment.

Best regards,