There's no one in this newsroom who doesn't think it's newsworthy to investigate and publish information, including quality interrogative commentary, on how politicians are bankrolled. We do it regularly, it's part of our mission. To suggest otherwise is bad faith. https://twitter.com/CTGuild/status/1289230618472005632

The issue is George Soros, a political financier and booster of the "progressive prosecutor" movement, is also the target of conspiracy theories, rooted in anti-Semitism, about his control of governments and people. Any responsible writer would differentiate and provide context.

There have been a number of acts of recent violence inspired by Soros conspiracies. Not that he uses money to influence politics, but that there are "Soros prosecutors" etc. One does not have to be anti-Semitic — and I do not think John is — to parrot these dangerous tropes.

Attributing spikes in violence to George Soros ignores all sorts of available counter-evidence/explanation, and undercuts the will of voters writ large and changing attitudes on criminal justice and social justice. ...

Any reasonable, fair writer would engage these and be careful to ward off the bigoted and mentally unstable from the anti-Semitic conspiracies. That column did not. It fell far below standards. An objection by parties with skin in the game was raised internally. Here we are.

I've long said (and tweeted) cancel culture is a real and troubling phenomenon that needs to be discussed and pushed back on. It can also be deployed in the culture war in bad faith. That is what is happening here, rather transparently.

In conclusion, free speech is not carte blanche to publish in the Chicago Tribune. We exercise judgment over what we publish, what context we provide and how we frame things every day. As we should.