If the NY Times published its neurology doctor story knowing it would fuel misleading innuendo, as I'm now starting to believe, this is akin to the way the Murdoch family's Fox "News" behaves routinely.

This would transcend malpractice -- again, if what seems to be the case truly is the case -- into something deeply malevolent.

The Times has long needed a public editor with the authority to demand answers -- which is the obvious reason why they ditched that job years ago.