The evidence is in the article. He displays emails in their entirety that talk about members of the press colluding on coverage. That's admissible in a court of law.

Here are more emails[0].

It's put up or shut up time. Either you're going to provide a thorough counter of the evidence provided or everybody will know exactly what you are: a liar.

[0]: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/09/18/the-emails-that-p...

Applying the same standard of evidence to my others does in no way, shape or form solve your problem of providing evidence that's admissible in a court of justice that support the core points of the article? Since the Sarkeesians, Van Valkenburgs and Flynts of this world started out with claiming GG harrassment (and are profiting handsomely from it), it behooves them and their supporters to come up with evidence first.