Really there is an awful lot that one can say about the Atlanta Progressive News firing a reporter for "[holding] on to the notion that there was an objective reality that could be reported objectively, despite the fact that that was not our editorial policy".
One might say that Aristotle had a good go of it, but he simply had no place in modern opinioneering, and that it's about time someone took a professional editorial stance on the outdated notion of "an objective reality"; because really, that thing has been knocking about for literally (not literally) aeons, and we put little boys in chimneys in the old days, but we don't do that any more, so why do we still persist in this "objective reality" scam?
Perhaps one might wonder why the Atlanta Progressive News is throwing its lot in with the notoriously reality-averse Bush II administration: because that cadre's stance on reality in the age of the American Empire, while surely radical in its day, must have been supplanted by new and ever more exciting ontological advances since then?
I suppose in the end one has to give the Atlanta Progressive News some credit for hewing to cutting-edge scientific theories. Apparently the Universe is actually just a great big hologram anyway; so as long as the ousted Jonathan Springston is replaced by a foreign correspondent reporting directly from the holographic plane, then their stance on reality is to be lauded.
Hoorah for reality!?