Let's compare and contrast some things from this article. First, the lead:
Hollywood star Brad Pitt’s Hurricane Katrina charity is coming under fire after more than two dozen homes that his organization built are rotting.
Now, a good way down:
Homeowner Verret says the wood on her home has already been replaced with yellow pine.
‘It didn’t take no time at all,’ said Verrett, who has been living in the home for just over four years.
‘It’s just like they said. If something’s wrong, they make it right. We are very happy with our Make It Right home.’
The closest they find to a real critic?
Homeowner, Gloria Guy, said her home had not been reconstructed yet.
‘They replaced a lot of houses but they ain’t replaced mine. They’re supposed to come pretty soon and do it.”
She's annoyed that, for whatever reason, she wasn't among the first helped? Helped for a second time?
But, you know, what does it matter. Pitt's an arrogant celebrity, right?
Pitt has said he gets ‘far too much credit’ for the charity’s rebuilding efforts
Oh, he's just saying that to avoid the blame. Right, Daily Mail? He deserves a headline like this:
Brad Pitt's Hurricane Katrina charity under fire after homes are 'ROTTING from the inside in New Orleans'
The capitalization there was a very nice touch. Jolly good show, jerks.
(By the way, I can very easily imagine Gloria Guy saying what she did not as an accusation but more of a lamentation; her saying that they're supposed to come as a statement of fact and not a statement of cyncism. My issue is not with her, but with the way the article was reported and written.)
Updated to add: And then these jerks came up with this.
