Context (for those who might not be in academia): many academic publishing companies (like Elsevier) charge exorbitant prices for researchers to get their papers published as open access. Meanwhile, none of these researchers actually get anything in return for it (except for major street cred if their papers get highly cited)
In math most people publish their papers on arxiv regardless of whether they get published in a journal. Arxiv has its own moderation structure, but theoretically published peer reviewed articles should be more trustworthy because they’re reviewed by your peers. In reality reviewers don’t have time to read papers super closely so some shoddy research gets through even when no blatant corruption is involved. In pure math this isn’t a huge issue because the work usually speaks for itself, but for some areas, especially applied statistics, it’s not so obvious whether an argument is actually well supported or statistically cherrypicked.