[OldTimeCoffee]

Scientific American is a publication, not someone's Facebook page. The writing gets Scientific American's legitimacy when they publish it and it reduces Scientific American's legitimacy if it's of poor quality. Editor-In-Chiefs should remember that 'it's an opinion piece' isn't a valid defense to separate the work from the publication or argue against a poor quality writing. They shouldn't publish the piece if the work doesn't represent the views of the publication or meet the quality of work expected.

Sometimes I feel like we've forgotten what a reputation is and how they work. At the very least, it seems we've decided that opinions are functionally equivalent facts.