I recently criticized a Nikki Finke piece on Michael Kinsley, which criticized him for being too far to the left, and for not being far enough to the left. Turns out Kinsley himself is upset (no surprise there), in part for the same reasons I found her piece unfair:

Finke is hard to please. John Carroll stands accused of alienating “conservative subscribers” by hiring a “legendary lefty” (ie, me) to run the LA Times opinion pages, and also of “overlooking” Los Angeles’s “progressive movement” by hiring an “old school liberal” who makes no “serious argument” (also me).

Kinsley’s letter pulls no punches. It opens: “I knew that Nikki Finke is an idiot, of course, but I had no idea that she was such a fuddy-duddy.” (Via L.A. Observed.)

I also questioned the accuracy of Finke’s claim that the paper is ending the “Outside the Tent” feature. Turns out I was right to do so. Sunday Opinion Current Editor Bob Sipchen responded to my inquiry today to confirm that the feature is alive and well.

There is more shoddy analysis from David Savage in this morning’s L.A. Times, on the issue of the disclosure of John Roberts’s memos from when he was a Deputy Solicitor General.

Savage cites a case that he says supports the idea that attorney-client privilege may not apply to Roberts’s memos. The case’s holding depends critically on the fact that the attorney-client privilege for government lawyers must give way in criminal investigations. The court repeatedly emphasizes the criminal context, but Savage never mentions it. Rather, he makes it sound like the case applies to requests by congressional investigators as well, with an incredibly misleading discussion of the work product doctrine.

The distressing (and complex) details are in the extended entry.

(more…)