> Why did the Washington Post rehash this story recently and pass it off as news? They didn't pass it off as news. It's a long-form journalism story. This for

> Why did the Washington Post rehash this story recently and pass it off as news? They didn't pass it off as news. It's a long-form journalism story. This form covers more complex stories and aren't limited to new things that just happened. Stories where the facts come out over time or require multiple perspectives can't always be adequately told through a series of "what's new" updates. But, still, why? The editors of The Washington Post would have to answer that. The timing is arbitrary. They could have done it months ago or months from now. The author most likely found it, thought it would make a good story and pitched it to his editors (he is likely planning to turn it into a book if it gets some traction). This kind of thing would be a normal part of a journalists job. (Well, most don't get to do deeper stories like this very often, so he's probably pretty senior -- I just checked and he has a couple Pulitzers, so there you go.) I would guess the editors simply agreed with his pitch. In short: the timing is arbitrary. The people who do this kind of thing just thought it would be an interesting story to tell, in-depth.