Yes, this is indeed most likely the case! Their motto is also: don't retract unless it's really needed... As they want to avoid legal issues at all cases. But sadly, this is helping the frauds!

Interestingly, Yong Sik Ok, who is worse than Rinklebe remains safe. No retractions so far and still a highly respected scientist! Lol

That's how they become group leaders! With fraud. Will Oxford investigate?

It's not just the pressure from publishers. In situations like this it's because of corrupt editors making money/careers out of it. They don't care about the publisher/journal

There isn't really a report. But many editors are involved in the fraud. I have posted about this a lot before, but this was on twitter. If you want I can give you the names of the corrupt ones

Another one! great! This fraud is really on his way to the @retractionwatch.com leader board!

It's not 1 editor. It's 10 to 20. The entire journal has been set up to accommodate fraud. For years. The journal was on hold for 1 year already.

Yes, unsure why others, looking at you @elsevierconnect.bsky.social , wait so long!

We sure do! Delisted! Let's see and wait when they will finally start to retract. They have been investigating (especially Barcelo his role) but so far no retractions.

One might wonder how they came to the 'guardians of science' rhetoric in their article. Due to their use of ChatGPT or perhaps they 'follow' that idiotic twitter account and got some ideas there or... This piece of crap should get retracted by @springernature.com asap.

He is a big fan of the science guardians: x.com/Damia_Barcelo
Also check this out: theanalyticalscientist.com/issues/2025/... ; he claims he doesn't really know when it's a COI