Interesting, that's the first I've read of the selective editing claim. It seems like there is some room for ambiguity (What if RevoluSec intentionally withhel

Interesting, that's the first I've read of the selective editing claim. It seems like there is some room for ambiguity (What if RevoluSec intentionally withheld these emails to discredit wikileaks? Is RevoluSec CIA/NSA?) but certainly shifts my bayesian priors a bit. Thanks for sharing. Short of evidence that they published falsehoolds, I'd still argue that "disinfo" is a misnomer. But your above points certainly demonstrate biased reporting, as is found in any other journalistic organization.