If you want to be a CEO of a respected newspaper you better have your shit together or expect one of your journalist to write negative things about you.
Here is the thing, if you're going to break news, break all of it. The WAPO fucks up on the regular and prints retractions frequently. So it's not like breaking this and maybe having to retract was going to be some major loss on their part.
> Journalism is supposed to be free of conflicts of interest.
I didn't disagree with this.
>> American labor law to protect employees from retaliation
There sure are. Saying bad things about your boss, in public, is not one of them. We have the right to speak freely. That mean that the government can not curtail it. It does not mean that you can Scream fire in a crowded theater. It does not mean you can slander people (Alex jones). It does not mean your employer cant fire you over what you say... saying bad things about your CEO isnt protected, neither is being a racist, or an assholee or..
> Business owners can't just do whatever they want.
No they cant, there are laws... however if you shit on your company or your boss they can fire you, legally:
It's for this exact reason that the role of ombudsman was created for many newspapers, although the role has been dying for a while now. Having someone on staff whose job it is to keep everyone accountable makes things easier on everyone.
They weren't asked to say something nice, or make something up. This wasn't an advertiser.
Leak the story somewhere else and keep your dam job.