A journal is at risk of closure after its publisher, with whom its editors had crossed swords on several occasions, dropped the title.

The editor of Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation suggested that Taylor & Francis¡¯ decision might be linked to a dispute over the planned publication of a series of articles on shaken baby syndrome. The publisher, however, said that the decision was ¡°related to the journal¡¯s commercial performance¡±.

The periodical had been published by Taylor & Francis since 2000, when it moved to the UK from Australia, and was known for convening debates on contentious issues.

A previous spat with Taylor & Francis saw Prometheus¡¯ editorial board threaten to resign en masse in 2014 when the company demanded large cuts from a debate paper?that criticised the behaviour and profit margins of commercial publishers, including Taylor & Francis¡¯ parent company, Informa.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Although publication of the debate was delayed for eight months, Taylor & Francis eventually apologised for being ¡°overzealous¡± in its ¡°concern to avoid legal and copyright problems¡±.

Stuart Macdonald, Prometheus¡¯ general editor, said the two sides then enjoyed a ¡°peaceful few years¡± of working together.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

But the relationship ran into trouble again last year when the editors proposed a debate on shaken baby syndrome, including a proposition paper by Waney Squier, a consultant paediatric neuropathologist who has questioned the science behind convictions in several infant death cases.

Professor Macdonald, a visiting professor in the University of Leicester¡¯s School of Management, said that Dr Squier¡¯s paper was sent to Taylor & Francis¡¯ lawyers in October and then, in January, the publisher asked to inspect the other 10 submissions. These included papers by lawyers, the chair of the General Medical Council and a senior Metropolitan Police officer.

In March, the lawyers said that they had no objections to publication, on the proviso that a second opinion should be sought on Dr Squier¡¯s paper, and some of the responses.

But, in June, external lawyers said that all 11 papers were likely to be libellous. Professor Macdonald said that Taylor & Francis required changes to all the papers, but failed to specify what these should be, and production ground to a halt.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Then, in July, Taylor & Francis told Professor Macdonald that it was divesting Prometheus.

¡°Just why Taylor & Francis should take such draconian action is not entirely clear,¡± said Professor Macdonald. ¡°It may be that Taylor & Francis has become totally risk averse.¡±

Professor Macdonald said that he had been told in a meeting with managers from Taylor & Francis that ¡°they had found a solution to the problem of publishing the debate ¨C they would simply separate themselves from us completely, with immediate effect and no transition period¡±.

But a Taylor & Francis spokesman said that the decision was on commercial grounds alone.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

¡°The journal has been publishing behind schedule for some time, despite the best efforts of those who have been working on it, with the most recently published issue being issue 1 of 2017,¡± he said. ¡°Over the same period, the journal has lost the majority of its subscribers.¡±

Professor Macdonald said that he was seeking a new ¡°smaller publisher¡± for Prometheus, ¡°with whom we can share academic values¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Taylor & Francis said it intended to publish the final three issues of the current volume before the end of 2018. ¡°We are supporting the editors to achieve this,¡± the spokesman said.

rachael.pells@timeshighereducation.com