[mike_hearn]

It's true that they do this sort of thing for political reasons, but it sounds like the original NYT report wasn't meant to be merely a paraphrase of a specific UN report? In which case, it would be legitimate to cite other sources and report that they disagree?

[skrtskrt]

No it was a paraphrase of the report and cited no sources that disagreed. It simply sneakily misrepresented the contents and buried the links to the actual report.

[mike_hearn]

Then yes, that's very bad.