Maybe the Times Thursday Styles section should be renamed the Michelle Obama section. Today's contains not one, not two, but three articles mentioning the first lady. Some might consider it overkill.
The main cover story about a businessman who invested in a move called "Fed Up" reports, "Michelle Obama, a noted advocate for better eating habits, declined to participate." This is an example of finding a way to insert Michelle Obama into an article even when she has nothing to do with the article.
Then there is a fashion article that reports in its opening paragraph, "Lane Bryant, the plus-size retailer, was presenting a collection designed by Isabel Toledo, a designer probably best known for the lemon-grass wool lace dress and matching coat Michelle Obama wore on the cold morning of the 2009 inauguration."
Then there is a column about the clothes Mrs. Obama wore on her trip to China. That article is a great example of how the Times outsources its standards on anonymous sources to other publications. The Times reports:
A former aide told The New Republic: "The first lady having the wrong pencil skirt" is as big a misstep (the term used was a less-publishable one) as "a policy initiative that completely failed."
Does the Times even know who this anonymous former aide is, or is it just taking the New Republic's word for it?