Billions wasted pursuing publication over meaningful effort.
Yes but what about all this unnecessary gatekeeping? gatekeeping is necessary to maintain a certain level of quality. On this specific issue of formatting gatekeeping. There was no conspiracy. I imagine that the policy solidified over time. The paper wants to maintain a specific look. Authors are upset when changes get introduced while formatting. The paper then says "you can format it yourself if it meets our specification". Now you have to format it yourself.
Thankfully in our web enabled era there a ways to publish without going through a traditional publisher. However you will note that the quality of these publishers is a mixed bag, real science right next to quackery. No one has done the gatekeeping needed to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Which does the paper want more? To be the first with the results or to appear a particular way? Do the appearances help with "the results?"
How much does having a consistent "look" lend itself to the perceived professionalism and respect a journal has?
Scattered additional thoughts on desirability of publishing platforms.
* Self publish(and hope you are famous enough to get noticed)
* Publishing company that does little to no checking of papers.
* open web based publishing.
* corporate researcher, all published results stay in corporate library.