Not the first time they've published complete horseshit: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/12/the-ha...

Isn't that a bit much?

The human tendency to overreact should never be underestimated. The baby and bathwater idiom is not used often enough.

With Scientology's history? Hardly.

It would be if this were some kind of isolated case of bad journalism. But in my opinion of the Atlantic (formed well before this debacle) I'd say:

"Isn't that a bit late?"

Nah, I'd prefer my news sources not report based on who gives the most money. There are plenty of other options.

Thanks for the idea - just added here as well.

For anyone else who wants to do this too:

  theatlantic.com        38.118.71.170

</tongue in cheek>