NYT article on Kerry's efforts to get an Iranian deal -most of commentary is that he is too obsessed

[Mass]

9. This article is another sign that the media landscape is really getting worse and worse,

including in the Times.

a/ I had to google Michael Gordon, and here is what Wiki returns

Michael R. Gordon is the chief military correspondent for The New York Times.[1] During the first phase of the Iraq war, he was the only newspaper reporter embedded with the allied land command under General Tommy Franks, a position that "granted him unique access to cover the invasion strategy and its enactment".[2] He and General Bernard E. Trainor have written two books together, including the best-selling Cobra II. As a journalist for the New York Times he was the first to report Saddam Hussein's alleged nuclear weapons program in August 2002 with the article "U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts.".[3]

This should tell us a lot on the guy, between the two claims I put in bold.

The claim that Kerry is obsessive is an old one, that came out during the climate change debate, for example, but the fact that the reporter has clearly an agenda is very problematic.

Sentences like that pose problem too

" said the official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the talks.

Anyway, let's be clear. If Kerry was not involved, they would claim he is too detached. Frankly, I think the reporter has an ax to grind with the policy.