Washington Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander has an article on the July 18 Washington Post addressing the question "Why the silence from the Post on Black Panther story?" In it, among other things, he said, "The Post should never base coverage decisions on ideology..."
In response, I sent the following letter to the ombudsman today:
If ideology should never be the basis of coverage, why do you do it in this very article?
Liberal bloggers are referred to simply as "liberal bloggers," while you repeatedly call conservative bloggers "right wing bloggers" -- a more derisive, unflattering term.
If you can't check your own ideology at the door, perhaps you can't be the Post's ombudsman.
Unfortunately, this choice of words undermined the credibility of your piece that might have otherwise been viewed as balanced.
How are conservatives to believe the claim that "The delay was a result of limited staffing" when even its supposedly objective, dispassionate ombudsman has shown himself to be sympathetic to the ideological left?