This does not really answer the question -- one that someone at the Post should answer... perhaps most appropriately the author of this blog himself.

There is some fact-checking of op-eds that goes on, at least at the NY Times. I assume the Washington Post editorial board carefully considers and scrutinizes op-ed columns before publishing them.

If the Post is relentlessly plugging the work of one of its staffers, as it did in the case of this article and book, and then it publishes an op-ed ripping the work, readers deserve a bit of explanation as to why they would do that.

Posted at October 15, 2006 8:27 AM in response to Response to Dan Senor's WashPost Op-Ed

you wrote: "While I don’t want to be drawn into a back-and-forth debate on the pages of The Post or in cyberspace" --- that does seem to be what's going on here.

If, as you write, "there are some significant misrepresentations and inaccuracies in his piece that need to be corrected for the record", then why did the Post publish the column? Even an op-ed piece needs some level of accuracy, so I'm left questioning either you or the Post... not sure which at this point, maybe both.

Posted at October 11, 2006 9:42 PM in response to Response to Dan Senor's WashPost Op-Ed