I said I thought the authors of this piece had been used. That criticizes their role and their work product and it fully expresses the low regard I have for the lack of context the NYT delivered here. To go from a criticism of performance to a "smear" of integrity. How? 1/2
How can anyone ever strongly criticize the SUBSTANCE of any professional effort without doing so? I think this an epically misplayed narrative, disastrous for the republic. I am saying so. And my criticism of your colleague speaks to his performance here. It does not "smear"...
...him as a person or say a single thing about his "integrity" as you hyperbolically claim. I can readily concede the authors of this mess began the day hoping to do the best and most ethical work possible and still maintain that this outcome is poor. And I do. Can you...
...Ms. Haberman, conceive of a world in which the NYT is roundly criticized for its product and your first resort is not to declare that the integrity of your colleagues is being smeared and that your first resort is to attack the critic ad hom? It's grown-up stuff, but try.
