> Either that journalism is accurate or it isn't. If it's wrong they should issue a correction, or review how it could be misleading or slanted and offer an alt

> Either that journalism is accurate or it isn't. If it's wrong they should issue a correction, or review how it could be misleading or slanted and offer an alternate perspective. If it's correct they should stand by it. Why should a response or dialogue have to be in print? And why should a company's defense be limited to asynchronous communication? Debate is an accepted and effective dispute resolution framework, especially in areas where truth or fairness may be nuanced and is far from black and white. (Tax policy is a perfect example that is both nebulous and politically charged.) As arbiters and outers of wrongdoing, journalists play a critical role in speaking truth to power and holding parties to account. This does not absolve them from publicly defending their positions, or being challenged on them, however. FedEx is well within their rights in responding in whatever manner they see fit, same as NYT can agree or reject the challenge. Debate certainly ups the ante for all involved and is an interesting escalation tactic in the current media landscape.