1) Journal publication tends, though not always, to enhance the credibility of contributors.
2) Peer review often, though not always, allows the contributor to become aware of factors he or she might not have considered, including contrary data and errors of fact, and to have the opportunity to revise the article prior to publication, often avoiding embarrassment and improving credibility.
3) If one is genuinely grated by loss of rights to the article/research, he or she can now post it on their own website or blog. There are also several distribution networks to whom findings can be submitted, thereafter appearing across the internet and generating profits each time someone clicks on the link, and/or advertising appearing with the link.
4) The journal editors bear the expense of reviewing the work, submitting it to appropriate reviewers, and coordinating with them and the author(s).

There may be other similar or additional considerations generally taken for granted or not recognized. I hope the above were helpful in relieving the “insanity.” and frustration.

Michael M. Hobby