On his Twitter feed, Mike Daisey linked to a New York Times story about Foxconn utilizing shady labor issues in the production of the new iPhone, which is scheduled to be unveiled tomorrow.

Daisey1.png

New York Times theater and comedy reporter Jason Zinoman immediately took issue with Daisey's word choice:

Daisey2.png

Then another Twitter user, Jeanette607, got in on the act:

Daisey3.png

Zinoman and Jeanette607 took issue with Daisey's implication that the NYT story didn't contain original reporting when it, in fact, did contain original reporting:

Daisey4.png

Daisey gave up and issued a sarcastic-sounding retraction:

Daisey5.png

And when Zinoman tried to engage on some more of Daisey's word choice, Daisey got vulgar:

Daisey6.png

And then Zinoman closed with a vow:

Daisey7.png

UPDATE 1:05 PM: Apparently, Mike Daisey thinks that I intentionally left off "the real end of the discussion," so here it is:

Screen_shot_2012-09-11_at_1.04.46_PM.png

That sure does change the context of the whole conversation, doesn't it? Here's what Daisey just said to me via Twitter:

Screen_shot_2012-09-11_at_1.07.16_PM.png

I sure hope Daisey leaves me the fuck alone, now.