Although we can't seem to shake the nasty habit of writing in the royal we, occasionally one of our editors decides to shake off the cloak of anonymity to write a short, pithy statement long, rambling diatribe about a topic of their choice. Today, Debbie Newman is that editor.

Yesterday, Ben Smith of Politico wrote a longish, somewhat confusing article (provocatively titled "Clinton Campaign Kills Negative Story") detailing a glorified pissing contest between Hillary Clinton and GQ magazine. In said piece, ostensibly written in critique of agenda-driven journalism, the Clintons are depicted as calculating, evil and—worse still—analogous to Tom Cruise while GQ is portrayed as a spineless jellyfish,* who values self-preservation more than the basic principles of the First Amendment.

In other words, it's a completely subjective take on the importance of objectivity.

But before we delve too deeply into the crux of the article, allow us to quickly summarize its content for those of you prefer to receive your news in the far-more-manageable medium of rapid-fire bullet points.

• Atlantic Monthly staff writer Josh Green writes a sort-of nasty (but presumably accurate) article for GQ about the tensions within Hillary Clinton's campaign.

• Hillary, who doesn't like it when people write sort-of nasty (but presumably accurate) articles about her campaign, reportedly threatens to revoke GQ's access to Bill Clinton—slated as the December cover-story—unless they agree to kill the feature at once.

• GQ kills the story (in spite of Green's protestations) then hastily explains, "We kill pieces all the time for a variety of reasons." Of course they do.

• Not everyone is convinced by GQ's pat response, but neither Hillary nor anyone from the magazine has anything else to say regarding this matter.