Yes, THAT Jeff Gerth of long-ago Whitewater infamy wrote a multi-part series reviewing mainstream media coverage of Russiagate.

Beyond his background making this a Bad Optics issue, his actual work simply makes this bad. After a "backgrounder," Gerth starts part 1 of his review (ye gads, there's multiple parts) with an interview of Trump himself. Does Gerth really expect Trump to tell him anything that's not totally self-serving? That's beyond Gerth opting for "scene-setting" vignettes like this:

During my interview with Trump, he appeared tired as he sat behind his desk. He wore golf attire and his signature red MAGA hat, having just finished eighteen holes. But his energy and level of engagement kicked in when it came to questions about perceived enemies, mainly Mueller and the media.

DUH! Of course he perked up. Seriously. This is bad optics for CJR.

Presumably, other reviewers could have picked up on Bill Clinton's pre-2016 ties with Vladimir Putin.

Second, there have been other journalists critical of MSM coverage besides the troika, all problematic, of Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi and Aaron Maté. 

And, given what Duncan Campbell recently said about him, having Kyle Pope edit Gerth's series is ... interesting. 

On the other hand, Vox, from whence I saw the CJR piece, continues to try to connect the dots of a circus clown picture into a Monet water lilies painting on Russiagate, and continues to fail. It might have done better than a defensive critique of CJR and used someone other than Andrew Prokop.