> In the blog post she references (but, tellingly, does not link) This is standard procedure for most journalists - they prefer to present only their interpret

> In the blog post she references (but, tellingly, does not link) This is standard procedure for most journalists - they prefer to present only their interpretation (or spin) of events, rather than let their audience form their own opinion. See for example how many stories of someone making offensive statements omit quoting those statements. And if you'll allow me to reach a bit, it seems the cruder and more unpersuasive the statements are, the more likely they are to be quoted, while any more intellectual, compelling reasoning gets omitted. Edit: Flimm points out that in this instance, there is a link. So the article merely misrepresents it, and does not also omit it, which I maintain is the norm.