RS hadn’t been known as a lazy editorial shop until her later work came out... not as powerful as back in the day, but nobody referred to your typical unbelievable Rolling Stone piece or anything like that, far as I know. Read a bunch of their longform pieces around 2010-2014 and they were written in a pretty prosaic…

True, I’m not saying she was ever “good” (though her 90s-early 2000s award fodder hasn’t really been challenged AFAIK). I’m saying her own fabulism, which appears to have grown worse post-2011, is more interesting than Jackie’s, and it’s more than just lack of integrity/will to get ahead, it’s that she’s out of her…

Starred because I never looked at it this way before. Erdely was in so deep, and was behaving so irrationally herself, that she could have falsified every single quote.

So you believe that “founder” is a modern corruption (?) of “flounder” and the author should have used “flounder” here to describe Trump’s campaign, but you’ll defer to modern usage in this case?

Actually, you have it inverted. “Founder” has always been the more severe of the two (and thus most appropriate for Trump’s campaign, it is hoped). It’s “flounder” that’s merely loss of footing.

But working out that correction would mean being subject to regulations like Nerve Conduction Velocity... can’t have that!

“I’m getting a lot of credit because this was my so-called first choice, that was my first hire as we would say.”