This is the issue that woke me up. It is understandable to be mistaken or wrong...we all are. But when scholars are quoted out of context it seems lacking in journalistic integrity at best and deceptive at worst.
Of course, I've heard it explained this way by a former writer:
(1) People send in interesting quotes to the Watchtower.
(2) It is one person's job to verify the quote (that the words in the quote are accurate) and file these quotes away.
(3) Another person writing an article might reference from this system of quotes.
(4) If the person quoted complains, the feedback goes to another department, not Writing. The person who wrote the article and the person who filed the quote might not necessarily hear the complaint.
This system, that spans departments, is described as dysfunctional rather than unified. But apparently, these writers aren’t intentionally trying to be deceptive, they are just under extreme confirmation bias.
Sometimes though there are some cases that it would seem incredulous to believe that deception is not involved. Often is the case, the Watchtower often omits facts that would be "stumbling" to the "flock". They do not tell the entire truth.