I don't think you're familiar with David Cole. He's not some drone reporter, trying not to offend his government contacts. His main job is as a law professor,

I don't think you're familiar with David Cole. He's not some drone reporter, trying not to offend his government contacts. His main job is as a law professor, not a reporter. He's the legal affairs correspondent for The Nation, which is probably the premier left-oriented intellectual journal in the US. This journal was against the Iraq war from Day One, for example, and has never had any problem with its outsider status. Cole's most recent article in the NY Review is titled "We Kill People Based on Metadata" (http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-people-based-metadata/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-peo...). There is more on his track record here: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# I think, as a litigator and law professor, he's invested in the idea that both competing interests be recognized. But confusing that with hackery is a mistake. As is the notion that Cole feels a need to defend the WaPo -- he's not part of the WaPo. * Regarding the remarks nearby on the limitations of the NYT -- yes, the main problem with the NYT is that it is an establishment paper. Not always "liberal", but typically reliably "establishment". This partly explains their behavior WRT the Iraq war. And maybe also their assigning Michiko Kakutani, their all-purpose book reviewer (typically of literary fare, but not always), to such a political book. I think they would have been better served with a specialist.