Palko makes a good point:
Parul Sehgal has a devastating review of the latest from Naomi Wolf, but while Sehgal is being justly praised for her sharp and relentless treatment of her subject, she stops short before she gets to the most disturbing and important implication of the story.
There’s an excellent case made here that Wolf’s career should have collapsed long ago under the weight of her contradictions and factual errors, but the question of responsibility, of how enablers have sustained that career, and how many other journalistic all-stars owe their successes to the turning of blind eyes.
For example, Sehgal’s review ran in the New York Times. One of, if not the most prominent voice of that paper is David Brooks. . . .
Really these columnists should just stick to football writing, where it’s enough just to be entertaining, and accuracy and consistency don’t matter so much.