Bret Devereaux

And that is of course before one gets into the considerable controversy behind the fellow himself which one might think, given the manifest paucity of the inducement of the paper itself, would have been enough to warn @AntigoneJournal off. Was there really nothing better? 13/14

I'm not entirely sure why we can't criticise an article (which I thought was disappointing) or an author (with whose views I disagree profoundly) without a 'one strike and you are out' attitude to a journal and suggestions of bad faith, that seem to proliferate on here.

This is hardly Richard Rich giving false witness in court.

It’s one thing to profoundly disagree with someone. Even another if Singer’s embarrassing article was bad on its own. But this man literally had promoted the death and sexual abuse of disabled people. Specifically as well as generally. I don’t see how it can be argued that

publishing him could be in good faith.

1) As I've said, I find Peter Singer's views entirely unacceptable, as you'd expect from an old-fashioned Catholic socialist. That said, I wasn't aware (and am sorry to hear) that he *specifically* called for abuse - unless I misunderstand, you're accusing him of a serious crime?

2) I wouldn't have taken this particular article (let alone from him) myself, but I struggle to think why it should be only bad faith, rather simply a mistaken decision?