 |
 |
I have been thinking this too, and have decided not to even post a link on twitter - where my very small following is unlikely to have much of an impact! I think the more productive way might be to not engage directly with the article (that does not warrant it in any case) but to pressure TWQ for a statement, and to reflect on their peer review process, and perhaps the process more broadly in academia. And further to reflect how it is that someone can go through Princeton and Cambridge and remain fundamentally ignorant… Thanks for all the contributions to this discussion so far on this forum - it is a much appreciated thread! Lindsay Lindsay Sawyer Research Associate | Global Development Institute Rm G.038 Arthur Lewis Building University of Manchester | Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL Tel: +44(0)7799732237 On 13 Sep 2017, at 10:55 am, Hillary Shaw <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: That gves me a moral dilemma - I was going to post it on my foodeserts.org<http://foodeserts.org> article archive - which wouldn't boost the metrics of the journal - for others to read - but should I be publicising this article, (with, to put it mildly, serious flaws) up there at all? What does the rest of CG think? Dr Hillary J. Shaw Director and Senior Research Consultant Shaw Food Solutions Newport Shropshire TF10 8QE www.fooddeserts.org<http://www.fooddeserts.org> -----Original Message----- From: ANDERSON, BEN <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Sent: Wed, Sep 13, 2017 10:40 am Subject: "The case for colonialism", outrage and response "As Farhana and others have said on twitter, I think it's really important that, if the article is read, it's done so in a way that doesn't increase the metrics of the journal or the author. So we don't click on it, don't circulate it. " Ben ________________________________