If we discourage negative reviews, positive ones will lose meaning

Sadly this has also happened in the sciences. Poorly designed experiments, bad analyses, lack of understanding of basic concepts and paucity of knowledge of the literature are no longer criticised as they should be for fear of hurt feelings. This is unethical practice. Bad research, particularly in the sciences, needs to be called out and stopped. Unfortunately some of this now makes it into the 'literature'. We need to return to academia as it used to be and should be.

The treatment of Professor Robert Faurisson in the 1980s doesn't show Holocaust scholarship in such a favourable light. It seems to be quite a politicised area, in the sense that extra-academic forces impact on what happens in academia.

Who, specifically, "discourages" criticism. There is enormous variation and a collapse of objective and constructive criticism. But all the available evidence supports the opposite of Ian Pace, a musicologist

Who, specifically, "discourages" criticism. There is enormous variation and a collapse of objective and constructive criticism. But all the available evidence supports the opposite of Ian Pace, a musicologist

I have seen a similar debate on the issue of peer review of journal article submissions. In that case there are two features: first, instructions to the effect that reviewers should try to adopt a constructive tone, even when their confidential comments to the journal may be for rejection; second, the role of editor which is to arbitrate and make judgements that draw on a background and wealth of experience such that the peer review comments are not necessarily taken completely at face value but may be treated in a nuanced fashion. The same applies in my view to academic debates - some rules of engagement, and an effective chair.