[oh_sigh]

Why is it a given that "managerial incompetence" is what caused the demise of The Messenger? Maybe the vision was just wrong. Maybe the journos never produced any compelling content.

And when the author writes things like

> The idea that the affluent out of touch gentleman behind The Hill — itself a longstanding purveyor of clickbait and timid “both sides” journalism — was going to single-handedly change modern reporting was always laughable.

Then why should I feel sorry for the staffers that took the job, who now need to find another job?

And, finally, while I'm sure Finkelstein will be okay financially, I have a hard time seeing how him burning $50M of his stash as "failing upwards". What opportunities are now available to Finkelstein since The Messenger died, that weren't there before?