Update: in dialogue with the journal editors now. Thanks to those who stepped up as allies and friends to also raise their concerns. While I'm disappointed in the research quality, I'm more cut up by the class discrimination. I wouldn't wish "a taste for deprivation" on anyone else. - ThreadSky

smhall.bsky.social • 10 days ago

Update: in dialogue with the journal editors now. Thanks to those who stepped up as allies and friends to also raise their concerns.

While I'm disappointed in the research quality, I'm more cut up by the class discrimination. I wouldn't wish "a taste for deprivation" on anyone else.

Reposted from Sarah Marie Hall

Does Geography have a (working) class problem?

If you don't already know the answer, this should help;
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Ps fwiw, most chippies where I'm from are owned by Greek or Chinese families, but funnily enough this isn't even considered.

Comments

profjsdavies.bsky.social•10 days ago

Great job Sarah – hope you are doing well.

smhall.bsky.social•9 days ago

And you x

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

Which parts of the article do you take issue with, Jonathan?

andyharrod.bsky.social•10 days ago

🤯 This is a bizarre article. I need to give it a fuller read, but agree I have major concerns over class discrimination and the research quality. Be very interested to understand the wider research process and reviewers comments.

smhall.bsky.social•10 days ago

Thanks Andy, I've asked those very questions x

andyharrod.bsky.social•9 days ago

Thought you might have done!

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

Did you give it a fuller read, Andy? I'd be interested to know your thoughts.

drbevans.bsky.social•10 days ago

Thank you for following up with the editors. If there’s anything I can do to support, let me know.

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

Genuine and polite question: which parts of the article do you take issue with?

gypjh2000.bsky.social•5 days ago

I have resigned from geoforum board because of this paper. They obviously didn't value my opinion anyway despite having written on Brexit, place, identity (and oysters) but this paper never should have been published as is without serious revision.

gypjh2000.bsky.social•9 days ago

That's the craziest shit I ever saw in a geography journal. The editorial board should be sacked for allowing such terrifyingly poor scholarship to appear

smhall.bsky.social•9 days ago

I had to read it a few times, and check with others, because I couldn't believe what I was seeing.
I just cannot fathom how it got to be published, how many people it went through, who saw the title and the abstract at the very least.

stevepickering.bsky.social•8 days ago

You're on the editorial board, Phil.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/geoforum/about/editorial-board

gypjh2000.bsky.social•5 days ago

Yep resigned. Terrible paper. Sorry!

stevepickering.bsky.social•8 days ago

I'll be sure to add your comments to my CV, Phil.

smallhomesproject.bsky.social•5 days ago

i've written on Brexit and identity, and food / class relations so i was genuinely interested to read this. But as a journal editor myself, and 100+ papers into my career, I've edited, and possibly written, more bad papers than you've had chip takeaways. But this paper is both bad and offensive!

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

Is that you own view, Phil, or are you speaking on behalf of all members of your UKRI-funded project "No space like home?"?

stefanb23.bsky.social•10 days ago

If someone wants to write a response to this nonsense, I have a suggestion for the graphical abstract

smhall.bsky.social•10 days ago

My suggestion is less polite.

smhall.bsky.social•10 days ago

😆

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

You might want to read the paper before writing your response, Stefan.

stefanb23.bsky.social•5 days ago

I wouldn’t have commented on it without having read it. I think the paper should be withdrawn and an apology issued.

stevepickering.bsky.social•4 days ago

Glad to hear it. Why should it be withdrawn, and why should an apology be issued?

stefanb23.bsky.social•4 days ago

Do you not see a problem with the stigmatising and derogatory language used in the paper? Or the statement (using questionable evidence) that chippies are a 'marker of low educational attainment'? All this against a background of long-standing epistemic violence against working-class people/places.

stevepickering.bsky.social•4 days ago

To say that the language in the paper is "stigmatising and derogatory" is absurd. You also misquote the article. What bothers me most is that you call for a paper to be withdrawn and apologised for because you don't like it.

heritagemcr.bsky.social•10 days ago

Woooowser.

smhall.bsky.social•9 days ago

Where to begin! X

heritagemcr.bsky.social•9 days ago

I thought it was a satire paper at first! x

smhall.bsky.social•9 days ago

Yeah someone else told me they checked it wasn't an April Fool!

stevepickering.bsky.social•5 days ago

No, it wasn't a satire paper.

olimould.bsky.social•10 days ago

This is crazy - well done for speaking out. Why is this blatant correlation ≠ causation nonsense deemed publishable? I'm reminded of Lisa Simpson's Tiger-repelling rock....

smhall.bsky.social•9 days ago

Ha!

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply