More of the same Watson bashing. We can agree the behavior was wrong; it was punished. Nobody, myself included, condones the conduct. But this outrage journalism is puzzling. It condemns, vilifies, and immediately struck me as self-contradictory. Just piles on with a number of incidents that have been covered before. It adds little except one more cliche attack. What is the purpose for this piece beyond another sale, and indulging those who never tire of attack stories like this. In his own words, the root of his contempt as stated, what is this if not splendid proof of "media-directed narrative"? As written by the writer himself, this illustrates his hypocrisy.
Watson deserves a chance to live up to his words. Any complaints that he is not yet punished enough fall to those who judged and punished him. And if this writer doesn't care for his reaction, so be it. I would like to know what could imaginably tone down hatchet articles like this. An apology judged suitable by any and all writers? How easy to pass judgment, sit in judgment, while embracing your foregone conclusions. Put more simply, judge the writer's purpose first, before the topic. In practically every case, it is the story this writer wants to write.
| 
