I love the fact that there are actual responses shown for this NYT post. On the contrary, Jay Carney chose to hide the responses both to his original post, and his reply to this post. Regardless of the merits of the posts themselves, this is an extremely telling — and crucial — detail. I hypothesize that as Jay comes from the DC damage control culture, he demonstrated various aspects of it — coming back late with a contrived reply, trying his best to subvert the original message, attacking sources, picking on a plumage — a lead quote. As Dean replies here, all of these do not change the key points raised in the original piece. Jay’s own key point in the reply to this post, that the crux of the matter is NYT’s failure to submit to the ultimate fact checking by Amazon, is fundamentally a lament of his failure to control the narrative, when the former employees in question are outside company reach. But the whole idea of the original NYT piece was to escape it and tell a story without it. I wonder what NYT could have done to keep the alarm ringing — about our lives, work/life balance, dangers of dehumanizing technology, importance of empathy. I wonder if Jay can write a version for us, acceptable to him and to Jeff, and still making the important contributions to the public discourse the original has made, capable of eliciting Jeff’s recommendation for every employee to read it and uphold the empathy in every case.