And it pains me deeply to say so. But take a look at what Brady says in his lead, and what the Post does in another publication it owns, Slate (bottom left):

Now, I know that Jim carries his superduper magic "I'm a professional and you're not" decoder ring with him wherever he goes, and I left mine back at the house, but I'm very hard pressed to see the difference, from the standpoint of being Civil, between claiming O'Reilly has "elephantiasis of the ego" in Slate, and commenting that Brady is "a twit without a functioning brain" in the comments section of WaPo. Without getting into the truthiness of it all.

But wait... I'm getting something... Maybe there is a difference... It's becoming more clear... Yes! There is a difference! The comments are from readers. Now I get it! It's the readers who have to be Civil! Not the paid professionals! Now it's all clear!

Because when you're a WaPo reader, your job is to show due deference, tug your forelock, tip your hat, and call Jim Brady "Massa." And send those hits his way. The Post business plan needs them.

What a WATB.

NOTE From The MOQUOL:

What happened on your blog was not a debate--it was a correction. And corrections are sometimes severe. I note, with some interest, that none of your reporters or columnists has repeated Ms. Howell's "inadvertent error" since your readers issued their correction, so I have to assume that it took. I'm glad.

Oh--and Mr. Brady, just one more small thing: all errors, by definition, are inadvertent. If you feel the need for a good editor, you've got my email.

Heh.