ProPublica even wrote a long statement on why they believe publishing this is ethical, legal, and in the public interest: https://www.propublica.org/article/why-we-are-publishing-the....

You can of course disagree with their reasoning, but Arnold—who claims to be, it is worth noting, a paid PR flack for tech companies—is being disingenuous* to suggest that ProPublica claimed their "sole criteria for publishing" is "truth".

* By which I mean, to be perfectly clear, he's a liar.

Anyway, I awarded a correction bounty here. I'd said in the same piece "if your only criteria for publishing are some measure of verification and some measure of newsworthiness", but used poor phrasing in saying "sole criteria" prior. I don't think it was likely to mislead the fair reader. But a mistake is a mistake, and I'm happy to own it.

"lol at" = not actually denying it, so not technically lying, right? ;)

I write all the time about what my day job is, and I regularly disclose it whenever there is even an vague intersection with a story I'm writing. It's not a secret!

Lots of people drift between comms and public writing. When there's a perception of conflict, they disclose. As do I. Pretty routine.