I'm still waiting for the thread that says there are all sorts of voices in this business, there are readerships (both those who like and those who hate) for every one of them -- running the gamut from Dave Anderson to Scoop Jackson -- and that I have yet to hear of a person who was permanently disfigured by an opinion or the style in which it is expressed.
It would say that editors need to be open to providing forums to new ideas and styles and people of all ethnic and social and gender backgrounds, and that somebody who refuses to allow somebody to speak to this demographic or that because he or she doesn't talk or think that way is simply limiting his or her readership in the most competitive time in media history.
It would say that a lot of crap on here lately criticizing people who are getting or already have great opportunities is jealousy, no matter how hard they try to deny it.
It would conclude that columnists you like and those who don't is a personal thing, and why people get so bent out of shape over the ones they don't like is a complete mystery.
Not that I'm expecting to see that thread anytime soon.
(This isn't about Powell, a class act. This is that there's also room for Whitlock, who goes about things a different way. Why do people have such a hard time with that?)