New York Times shoots the messenger after admitting the message was correct

The New York Times has finally admitted there is a conflict of interest having Linda Greenhouse reporting on the Supreme Court cases in which her husband was a litigant. Ed Whelan complained to the NYT about this problem months ago, and the Times "public editor," Clark Hoyt, admitted in a column on Monday that Ed Whelan's complaint was legitimate. But Hoyt spends the first several paragraphs attacking Ed Whalen. Here is PowerLine's Paul Mirengoff:

According to Hoyt, Ed is guilty of “increasingly intemperate and personal attacks on Greenhouse” which “indicate something other than a legitimate concern about ethics.” To Hoyt, they “feel like bullying.” But Hoyt fails to cite any such personal attack. As far as I can tell, Whelan limited himself to describing the conflict, which Hoyt concluded is real, and to debunking Greenhouse’s attempt to dissemble her way out of it. In what sense does that constitute a personal attack?

At NRO, Ed Whelan responded to Hoyt's article in a 3-part post here, here, and here. The mainstream media is getting a little testy.