[Cboldt]

Well, being a writer myself, I can suggest to you that what happened is she showed all the responses to her editor, and they thought, hey there's more of a story here than we thought, why don't you write about it. And that editor is right. A voluminous response, much of it hate mail, is interesting from a journalistic point of view--it's a story in itself.

Well of course the editor and writer want to fill space with stuff that sells. That is, after all, the point of the art. But I'll tell you what I think. I think the writer is at best stretching the truth if/when she asserts "much of the voluminous response is hate mail."

I believe she is mischaracterizing the response, in order to justify her original critique. She has not changed her position.

I agree with your point that it's a story in itself. But if her follow-up story is to be taken seriously, as more than "piling on," she needs to serve up more than vague whining.

[equus]

I am not sure I see it as whining, but I do get the impression it was an assignment from her editor, and she did her best to fill it. That's why it doesn't quite come off. Or that's my impression.