BTW, my point about the uber popular podcast, was that since both hosts are highly noted persons in their professions, and generally lean towards not being very negative towards anyone's private persona. Case in point, a more well known guest, on a live recording in front of an audience of the show, inadvertently revealed a private fact about a dceased person involved with the podcast's topic. The person was well known in his profession, but the detail was only known by those close to him, and has never been made public, even over a decade now since his passing. It wasn't said maliciously, and intended to be an example of his perseverance, but because it was something never publicly disclosed (even if among those who knew him it was a “worse kept secret”) the hosts of the podcast omitted that part of the discussion from the released recording. Yet they've trotted out the negative aspects and opinions about Mother Teresa from Hitchens and other biased sources as if they were generally accepted truths. Hence why I wonder if the negative stuff about her is now, no pun intended, gospel when it comes to discussing her. And not just to be dismissed with a “consider the sources” handwave as 41Forever suggests. And therefore, why a NYT piece from the same week is the only investigative piece on the Rivera pool tragedy.