So I read your article about Greenwald and I would have to say that, like the piece you are criticizing, it is both right and wrong.  First of all, Glenn Greenwald has a nearly religious focus on fact-checking and accuracy that you don't often see in modern journalism.  He has completely dispensed with any pretense of neutrality and practices advocacy journalism.  And for the record, ALL journalists should be biased towards the truth, not "objectively" reporting BS with facts to get a more "balanced" picture.

The problem with venues like FoxNews or MSNBC is that they DO NOT have this zealous approach towards factual accuracy that real journalists like Greenwald have, so to pretend like they are even remotely similar to The Intercept is missing the point completely.  It's okay for journalists to do a little investigation and fact checking rather than uncritically publishing the claims of "both sides."  It's okay to point out that one side is wrong sometimes.