You'll recall that the profile irritated both Palin's defenders and detractors with its focus on her personal travails and alleged temper. (And yes, her alleged wielding of a push-up bra.)
First, Michael Joseph Gross offers a correction, initially pointed out by Politico's Ben Smith:
In briefly describing a scene in which I saw members of the Palin family (Sarah, Todd, Piper) just before Sarah Palin spoke at an event in Independence, Missouri, I assumed that the child with Down syndrome who was among the Palins was their son Trig. This was a mistake, and I regret the error.
Incidentally, it wasn't a brief description, it was the dramatic opening scene, used to make a point about Palin as an attention-grabbing cipher using her children as props, but whatever. Gross also responds to several other claims of factual inaccuracy (especially how he characterized the organizations that paid for Palin's speechmaking) and then goes back to the mother of the other child with Down Syndrome, who happens to be, to put it charitably, a little confused. She thinks she spoke to Gross; she didn't. She thinks he followed around the Palins with their assent; he didn't.
None of this, of course, gets to the heart of several reasonable people's issues with the piece: that it drew a sharp portrait of a monster that had nothing to do with her pernicious policy influence, such as it is, or that it played into the hands of people who believe the media will stop at nothing to destroy Sarah Palin. Gross says he'll eventually get to those, though.
Image Via Vanity Fair