This is a tempest in a teapot, methinks. Especially since I can't quite figure out who is the bigger jerk, the poster or the whiner with bully pulpit access to mainstream media sources to vomit righteous indignation all over the nation in USA Today.

I'm with those who say consider the source of anything. As far as I'm concerned, I'd trust Wikipedia before I would trust the mainstream media.

The supposed cream of the crop of American journalism is the NY Times. Anyone remember Jason Blair? Why he just made stuff up and had it published in the Times too.

Or hey--how about the American mainstream media and the so-called intelligence on the war in Iraq, hmmm?

And I read the original article at Wiki (this is an old news story). It certainly didn't rise to the level of libel for a public figure like this whiner. It's a very grey area, and certainly it's author could have claimed it was a parody. Not a particularly good one, but libel laws do allow public figures to be lambasted.

Wiki is much more on top of this than the NY Times has been with the Jason Blairs and Judy Millers, or the Washington Post has with Woodstein.

I find people who are obsessed with character, and quick to scream character assassination, usually don't have much of it themselves. This case (and this thread) certainly prove that.

I'm with the poster above who said that sort of thing should be left to Fox News. ;-)