The availability of new technologies, combined with changing perceptions of traditional journal publications, has created a wave of “new models” for reviewing and publishing scientific research. As the Journal of Herpetology (JH) celebrates its 50th anniversary, this is an appropriate time for the membership of SSAR to consider what kinds of changes in JH are needed to meet the needs of those who publish research in herpetology. In this review, I focus on three issues with traditional models of journal publications: criticisms of the peer-review process (especially bias and elitism); issues with rapid communication of research findings; and increasing calls for better transparency and openness of data. For issues such as gender or age bias, I provide support for calls for changes such as double-blind reviews to reduce the prevalence of such bias and also review new methods for making peer reviews more open and efficient. Conversely, I find serious problems with mechanisms such as citable “pre prints” that have been suggested as a means to increase the speed at which research findings are made available and review alternate models that can accomplish the same goal without sacrificing the integrity of journal publications. Ultimately, how JH and other herpetological journals respond to these challenges will be an ongoing process in which the membership needs to be strongly engaged.