I don’t know, perhaps someone should ask them. The people at the NYT Book Review who have been oh-so-concerned with such putative associations in other cases, for instance.
If, worst case scenario, it turns out that Niall Ferguson bribed some one in the NYT Book Review with actual money, prostitutes, and promises of access to Donald Trump, that would mean what? That we can’t trust the NYT Book Review (anymore?!?) ? That neo-con pseudo-academic authorized biographers can’t be trusted (anymore?!?) ? That Rush Limbaugh now can make a throwaway line about “even the liberal NYT Book Review realizes that Kissinger wasn’t so bad”?
.COM: Illustration News: BRIAN STAUFFER ILLUSTRATION: NYT BOOK REVIEW
But, amazingly, given the numerous Best Books picks to date, the NYT Book Review still managed to include three titles in their top ten that were not picked by any other sources, proving once again how difficult it is for critics to agree: