Even though this is often better than publishing articles yourself on the web, due to ReputationEconomics, this model is not superior to normal journalism. Both have a reputation to defend, so obvious abuse will not be tolerated. Both allow subtle abuse, however: In PeerReviewedJournals, reviewers and would-be-authors are part of the same community, thus chances are that reviewers might be competitors or better friends with competitors. Thus publication of some articles can be delayed or prevented. In normal journals, this can happen as well, but there at least, the responsibility is not shared with an anonymous group of reviewers. PeerReviewedJournals make it harder to EnforceResponsibility.