Adam Dickter’s story about the 2013 mayoral election (“With Election, City May Be ‘Reverting Back to Form,’” Nov. 8) contains a remarkable example of bad journalism. Out of nowhere, in a pre-election story about Bill de Blasio’s likely victory, Dickter tells readers that the Occupy Wall Street movement of late 2011 was “… popular, though ultimately pointless.”
Why are a reporter’s political biases included in a long and detailed news story that has virtually nothing to do with Occupy Wall Street? This isn’t an opinion piece and we are given no rationale whatsoever for why Occupy Wall Street was “ultimately pointless.” I think Dickter is wrong, but even if he’s right this is hardly the appropriate place or way to address the issue. His loaded attack is simply unprofessional.
Manhattan
