Technical soundness is not light peer review. It's the core of peer review. Everything else is editorializing and selling "importance". As a matter of fact you

Technical soundness is not light peer review. It's the core of peer review. Everything else is editorializing and selling "importance". As a matter of fact you can get plenty of crap into the higher tier Science/Nature journals if you just tell a good enough story about importance. You can leave the real work to disentangle whether the story is true to others that can publish in lower impact topical journals. Generally speaking I believe Science and Nature, and the role they occupy in academia, are a major problem for science. They are huge contributors to overselling and hype driven research.