It depends. I was tempted to do something about a piece that appeared in the local paper months after I left. The piece was about a guy who's still on staff and is in trouble. The writer invoked my name to speculate that my departure had to do with this person's troubles. He was wrong on all accounts, including the org chart. But I decided to stay pat because I figured the piece had been in cyberspace so long that it would show up no matter if I paid somebody to push to the back of the search engines. I decided that the risk of "getting caught acting guilty" was not worth it. So I practiced a quick response instead: Yeah, the org chart there is complicated. Sometimes it even stumps the reporters. The fellow mentioned in the story has always-- and still-- reports directly to the board, not the ED.