The peer-reviewed journal PLoS One, published by the San Francisco-based Public Library of Science, said following a JNS report that it is investigating how it published an article by a Hamas official.
“PLOS upholds the highest international standards for research integrity and publication ethics, and follows up on all concerns raised about our publications in accordance with COPE guidance and PLOS policies,” Beth Baker, senior media relations manager at the Public Library of Science, told JNS on Monday.
“Following this query, we will investigate if any breach of our editorial policies has occurred, and if so, will take action accordingly,” Baker told JNS.
The journal recently ran an article about “rebuilding Gaza’s health system,” which Youssef Abu al-Rish, deputy health minister in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, penned with colleagues from Newcastle University in the United Kingdom and University Hospital of North Norway in Tromso.
Al-Rish is designated the 10 of spades in the set of playing cards of Hamas officials.
Kurt Schwartz, CEO of Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis, told JNS that the “publication of an article authored by a senior member of Hamas—a genocidal, antisemitic terror group—in a respected academic journal raises grave concerns about how distorted anti-Israel narratives are being legitimized by influential institutions.”
“We know by now that this is not an isolated lapse but part of a well-organized campaign to normalize hostility to the Jewish state across mainstream culture,” he said. “These threats are exactly why CAMERA continues to expose and counter the bias and lies that amount to an 8th front of the assault on Israel.”
Dr. Yael Halaas, president and founder of the American Jewish Medical Association, previously told JNS that “this is yet another example of biased articles weaving in slanted political propaganda that have been published in ‘scholarly’ scientific journals.”
“We have seen a disturbing pattern in peer-reviewed academic journals: material that is not grounded in rigorous science, that lacks any balanced or critical perspective and that undermines the integrity of the scholarly process,” she previously told JNS. “What is presented as ‘peer reviewed’ too often reflects ideological bias rather than credible scientific inquiry.”
