Former MSNBC host-turned PR employer of media people Dan Abrams has sent us a response to our coverage of his project, in which we pointed out that being a journalist and a corporate consultant at the same time is a conflict of interest. You can judge it for yourself, but we should note that, 1: If media reporters gave free passes to all friends and/ or former colleagues, media reporting would be even worse than it is now, and 2: Like we said, we're not allowed to sell out until after we've been laid off. Permanently. Here's his full note:

Hey Hamilton. I guess having Lock[hart Steele, founder of Curbed Network and former managing editor of Gawker Media] on the board does not immunize us! I actually appreciate the intellectual honesty in that regard. I was hoping you would post my response to your "thoughts" about my biz. Thanks, Dan ——————————— We are not employing full time journalists who would be precluded from participating. Period. We are not employing journalists who have any sort of conflict. Period. There are current journalists who are either freelance or even on contract who would be available. For example: shouldn't I be able to hire a current producer who is freelancing twice a month for a local affiliate? If that person also used to be the executive producer of one of the nightly news programs, he or she could have very useful insights. And what about a financial journalist who used to be full-time at the Wall Street Journal but is now only occasionally writing freelance feature pieces? Is that person automatically off-limits because she is still writing at all? And what about all the journalists who give paid speeches or get paid to sit on panels? Why is this so different? The media companies are forcing people to go freelance, not us. Give me a break! We could not be taking ethics any more seriously. Come on Hamilton — we want you in the network! Dan PS. . nice photo choice. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

[Photo above, which he referred to, via Rachel Sklar]