2 ms·

But a take they didn’t chose to take, that’s the point.

• shadowgovt 7y ago
  The author appears to have missed the takes that were actually that (Guardian was one).
  • TomMckenny 7y ago
    He missed quite a few: but of course the author is not writing to inform but shape opinion of a religious leader.
• anigbrowl 7y ago
  It's not very meaningful. The article is saying you can't trust journalists in general because one of them had a take he disliked about a person he admired. The existence of a more gentle take about someone else on tells you about the editorial view of one writer or one editor at one outlet. It doesn't establish some sort of standard to which all other obituaries must adhere.