Did you read the blog post? It discusses a much more update-to-date case of this happening, by a reported who just recently submitted a fake paper to a bunch

Did you read the blog post? It discusses a much more update-to-date case of this happening, by a reported who just recently submitted a fake paper to a bunch of open-access journals, some of whom accepted it. He then wrote the experience up and submitted it to Science, who is spinning it as something typical of open-access journals. More more notable than the fact that some fly-by-night, pay-to-play "open access" journals accepted a scientifically and ethically dubious paper is the fact that there now exists a large body of established, high-quality open access journals who roundly rejected the paper and pointed out its many flaws. Meta publication bias strikes again.