[Mikhail_K]

> Refreshingly well-researched and honest piece from the New Yorker.

My impression is quite the opposite. This piece by Larissa MacFarquhart was a contemptible whitewash of government bullies. "New Yorker" is squarely in the corner of intelligence agencies and law enforcement and against the people, and not just in this particular case.

[mattzito]

I'm curious how it's a whitewash of government bullies when that's not the point of the article? It's pretty clear at the start that it's about how his friends and family perceived him, and his backstory - I was aware of the overall narrative, but found it extremely interesting to hear stories of his challenges with interacting with the world.

In general, I respect and appreciate content that takes someone who has been lionized (especially posthumously) and humanizes them. People are complicated, the narrative is rarely as simple as it's distilled down for public consumption.

As far as the "squarely in the corner of intelligence agences and law enforcement" - that wasn't my impression, and while I did not spend hours researching, I went through the "police" tag on the new yorker website, and in the last year, 10 out of 21 articles were overtly critical of police, and only ~2 could be considered positive towards police. The remainder were either neutral, nuanced, or orthogonal (e.g. photo essays about a woman who was embedded with the police for several years). Do you have evidence to back up your assertion?

[boppo1]

Aww New Yorker is one of the few outlets I still like. Do you have examples?