Paragraph three: > “It’s like working for Steve Jobs. He can be brutal,” said one scientist. “But why would you want to work for anyone else?” And then the re

Paragraph three: > “It’s like working for Steve Jobs. He can be brutal,” said one scientist. “But why would you want to work for anyone else?” And then the rest of the article argues how he was not brutal-- a consensual relationship, fun office parties, etc. Why didn't Weiss ask a simple follow-up to the one scientist to give a few examples of what 'brutal' means in this case? Compare: "Oh, I mean he demands excellence at every turn professionally, both of himself and his colleagues, to such a degree that it's difficult to keep up with him." "Oh, I mean he is a megalomaniac who speaks with complete confidence about things he is just plain wrong about." Edit: clarification