You did a good job of interviewing Richard Wolffe, and he is to be commended for addressing Glenn Greenwald's criticisms so publicly. However, there is reason to believe that the underlying story has not been fully discussed, just by allowing Wolffe to protect his reputation with some fairly unsatisfying porridge about journalistic objectivity. It's all grey and sticky, but it just doesn't taste quite right.

Greenwald made a very persuasive case that Wolffe is being disingenuous when he claims to be a good journalist (objective, reasonable, skeptical), when he actually behaves quite differently, penning many laudatory hymns to the Bush administration that contained much information that is pure idolatry, without offering any counterpoint or balance, whatsoever. If anyone were to see only this interview and the follow-up, she would be very ill-informed as to Greenwald's very convincing case against Wolffe.

I know you have only so much time to conduct such an interview,  and god knows there are countless more immediate stories bouncing around, these days, but Greenwald should get a chance to answer Wolffe's self-serving (yet modestly filling) pablum.