The level of work that David Grann put in is a marvel. He generates an idea for a story, researches it, and has enough for an article. He has a queasy feeling a

The level of work that David Grann put in is a marvel. He generates an idea for a story, researches it, and has enough for an article. He has a queasy feeling about a subject of the piece (not unlike the art connoisseurs might have), and investigates further. He turns up lots of dirt on Biro, enough to put his claims into doubt. He has enough to write an article. But he doesn't! He investigates the fingerprints further, and finds expert analysis that indicates that the fingerprints are phony. Not writing the article yet, he takes all of his evidence back to Biro to examine his reaction. The editor also deserves credit. This is a damning article, but there is no evidence of sidestepping or evading the truth. All of the extra research was extremely time consuming, and when the author yelled, "This guy is a fraud!", he wasn't told to publish what he had, he was told, "ok, show me the evidence." "The man who keeps finding famous fingerprints on uncelebrated works of art" takes on a sinister tone after reading the article