Let me see here. The Washington Times gets to do an interview with Danny Boy Snyder on an exclusive basis and writes a positive story. Everyone here takes that to mean that the Washington Times is the beacon of truth, justice and the American Way while the Post is part of an Evil Empire.
Folks, if Woodward and Bernstien had rolled over and gone paws-up for the Nixon Administration after the Watergate break-in just as the Times did with Danny Boy, Nixon would have finished out his presidency. If you think that article is hard-hitting investigative journalism, I don't suggest you enrol as a journalism major at Columbia! Let me say only that the interviewer/author probably needed a breath mint after that session...
I don't think Nunyo Demasio is particularly good as a beat reporter; I find his writing style dull; he's not nearly as good as Mark Maske was. But the scuttlebut is that the new sports editor at the Post thought that Maske was "getting a bit too cozy" with the Redskins and so he made the switch. Now Maske does general NFL beat reporting and not just the Skins. I have no idea if that actually was the case, but that is what is out there on the wire. So Demasio's "marching orders" are to remain at arm's length from the team and to be an objective reporter. That tends to motivate him to have some negative stuff in his stories - wouldn't want the boss to think he was getting too chummy with "the story" causing Demasio to be reassigned to covering DC United.
And by the way, Demasio was a lot closer to "right" than "wrong" about the Coles story. Until he broke it, everyone here on The Warpath was 100% convinced that Coles' foot would be better and he would be the Skins' #1 WR and catch 90-100 balls for the Skins next year. You may not like the outcome of Demasio's reporting there because it guaranteed that the end of the Coles/Redskins relatinship would be acrimonious and not something where compromise was likely to happen, but you can't say he didn't do a reporter's job in getting to the bottom of the story.
I'd be willing to wager that Joe Crisp would have gone with that story had he had the story back in early February.
Of course Joe Crisp would have written better prose, but nonetheless, he would have run the story and run it hard!