Lee Fang did nothing wrong and the fact that no one at the Intercept stood up to him in the face of that horrid Akela woman speaks very poorly of the institution and all the big names there.
-
It's tough to know where to start with that. On the one hand, journalists need the freedom to interview people they don't necessarily agree with. On the other hand, Fang presumably did agree in the broad strokes with his interviewee because the man was clearly in the right.
So do we defend him on the grounds of free journalism (distancing ourselves from the fact that his subject had a point) or on the grounds of free thought (distancing ourselves from the fact that the interview was the right thing to do even if you disagree)?
