I do not get how people like Suzie Dawson get their cushy gigs at these billionaire paid for "news and information" organizations that prove, as Ms. Webb does here, are merely propaganda and opinion pieces in the guise of such. I want in. I know how to name call. I know how to not address issues and chop up sideways by diversion of disparaging remarks against the messenger who, in this case, is right on target. How would lowly me know? Because Webb works from known data on a comparative analysis against other, similar data for validity, thus we are allowed to think properly and know for ourselves -- role of journalists. Name calling and derogatory statements are not data. They equate to hiding and are the behaviors of scoundrels and thieves.
I am not employed by any media organisation. Whitney's one-sided depiction of our exchanges is unsurprising, but sad.
So who pays you pay to spend a week writing? Must be nice. I found the timeline in your piece about all the players very helpful -- until the third day 'chunk', I got to your one-sided exchange about Whitney. I watched those threads unfold in real time and started to write my own piece about the information being shared -- until you ditched professionalism for cattiness. Whitney conducted herself professionally. She has every right to defend herself against unwarranted attacks on her work and character, just as Caitoz does. That you are taking this personally and are continuing to dig [or do damage control?] says more about her character and professionalism than yours. I find that surprising -- and sad.
I spent four months researching and writing it. No one paid me to do so. I have not 'continued to dig', to the contrary, I have simply responded in comment form and wished Whitney well.