Follow the link and read the email that Weigel posted. You'll see that the entirety of Shannyn Moore's complaint consists of aesthethics and questions of anonymity. There is not one substantive argument in the entire email. Not once does Ms. Moore say that the Michael Gross misquoted her or anyone else. She does not point to a single factual inaccuracy. She's offended in how she was portrayed (the oldest aggrieved source complaint in journalism) and she cites someone who thought they had anonymity and didn't (the second oldest complaint).
Ben Smith has been flooding the zone on the problems with Michael Gross's dishy profile of Sarah Palin in Vanity Fair. I've talked to some Alaskan sources of mine and Gross's who are deeply unhappy with how the story turned out. Shannyn Moore, a radio and TV host in Anchorage, gave me permission to quote the e-mail she sent to Gross complaining about how he handled the material and sources. (In the story, Moore is portrayed rather cartoonishly, smoking and talking on her cell phone while driving, but there are people portrayed far more harshly.)
If Gross double-crossed a source regarding anonymity then shame on him but unless Ms. Moore has a substantive complaint she should really just STFU. Same for Dave Weigel, he published Moore's email as if it were a devastating indictment of the validity of the article - it is nothing of the sort.
Weigel does link to a more substantive critique by Ben Smith of Politico but we're still in the land of he-said/she-said. Smith should do some reporting of his own and try to independently confirm what his sources are telling him. You know, the same thing he is chiding Michael Gross for.