Publication in statistics and the sciences still relies heavily on peer-reviewed journal articles. The peer review process has been criticized on a number of dimensions. Common complaints include that outcomes appear random, the process takes too long, and incremental work is favored over innovative ideas. When the vagaries of the peer-review process are combined with the pressure on researchers to publish to advance their professional careers, it may lead to irreproducible research and various forms of academic dishonesty. How should the academic communities, especially the statistics community address these concerns? This talk discusses the issue from the perspective of the professional societies and their journals, emphasizing steps that can be taken by the societies and journals themselves, and ways in which the societies and journals can support other novel approaches.