The term of art for this process from the MBA side is "Extracting the value from the brand". The editor developed the reputation for good work, which had some value. Now they're cashing in by selling the brand attached to poor work. The reputation is decaying at some rate, but slower than the editor is extracting money.
Notice, for example, you're not helping it decay, your story can't be tied to the bad actor. You have good reasons for this, but it's why the scam works.
The key correlate to understand from "Extracting value from the brand" is that when the process is complete, there is no value left in the brand. It's explicitly setting up a con, defecting from the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Lying with more words.
My favorite examples of this pattern are from other areas of endeavor: Kitchen Aid mixers, which used to be an industrial quality offshoot of Hobart and now is trash; and Singer, which used to be a superb sewing machine, and now is trash.
Notice, for example, you're not helping it decay, your story can't be tied to the bad actor. You have good reasons for this, but it's why the scam works.
The key correlate to understand from "Extracting value from the brand" is that when the process is complete, there is no value left in the brand. It's explicitly setting up a con, defecting from the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Lying with more words.
My favorite examples of this pattern are from other areas of endeavor: Kitchen Aid mixers, which used to be an industrial quality offshoot of Hobart and now is trash; and Singer, which used to be a superb sewing machine, and now is trash.
But you can see the pattern in many places.