DickWhiskey

That is a non-answer. Did the PR team type it up for you?

Going into a foreign country, after a disaster, and expecting no miscalculations in this changing environment seems a bit naive to me.

These aren't simple miscalculations that can be attributed to changing environment. These are large errors in the presentation of that information that appear to be calculated to mislead the public. No one is saying that Red Cross is expected to have "no miscalculations," they're saying that Red Cross should present their figures (and miscalculations, if necessary) in a non-misleading way.

EDIT: Also, /u/jakobJohnston wrote this in another comment:

I'd also just add that one of the main responses from the Red Cross to this recent story was that Haiti is an incredibly hard place to work, with poor governance and land titling issues. Well, the reporters saw very similar problems with the Red Cross' work in New York. Do those problems exist there as well? I don't think the working environment is a valid excuse any longer.

AKA Every charity ever? Exaggerate for more $?

Show me another incident where a large charity inflated their numbers by a comparable amount.

You are a quite influential blogger (in your sphere, at least). How much influence do you think blogs have on the maintenance and evolution of social mores? For example, do you think that your blogging efforts regarding the First Amendment, censoring, and cyberbullying can have a positive affect on the climate at large, or are you essentially preaching to the choir?

How did you develop such a healthy tan while you were playing Hercules? Natural, fake bake, or bronzer?