I read dozens and dozens of articles about Woody Allen, Dylan Farrow, and the attic last week. After reading all those articles, I still don’t know who to believe. I’m sure that there are very qualified people who can get to the truth of these allegiations, but I’m not one of those people and neither are any of the authors of the articles. Either a man was falsely accused of child abuse or a child was abused — both are horrible crimes.

One thing is certain is that a family was horribly damaged, and the hate still festers 20 years later. That’s a tragedy.

After reading those articles, I have to say that I feel a bit icky. I feel icky reading about this troubled family. Even when you take away the child abuse issues, there was still so much selfishness and dysfunction in those stories.

By publishing this story and the rebuttle in the Times, I was called in to judge this situation. Why me? I don’t know these people.

The Times only ran this story, because it focused on the seamy underside of one wealthy, influential family. Since the Times published this story, doesn’t it have the obligation to publish the first person accounts of the millions of average victims? And why limit the public accusations to simply child abuse? Why not other crime victims that never had their day in court?

This article was link-bait, if I ever saw it. I think that the newspaper of record has to have higher standards than Gawker.