They give scant attention, a few paragraphs at most to the actual problems uncovered by the e-mail – suppression of inconvenient data, using tricks to change the reported outcome, suppression of dissent, undermining the peer review process. By contrast they give most of the space –- multiple paragraphs — to the scientists whose malfeasance was uncovered allowing them to say it not as bad as it seems, we “really” didn’t commit fraud, and that nothing contained in the e-mails was really important. It’s like the wizard in the Wizard of Ox saying “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain,” when in fact, the real action is going on behind the curtain.