The New York Times on Sunday expressed regret for offending readers by publishing a profile on a Nazi sympathizer, but defended the article as an important insight into the reality of those who hold these extremist views.

The article in question was a profile of Ohio white nationalist and Nazi sympathizer Tony Hovater, who was a foot soldier at the violent white supremacist rally in Charlotesville, Virginia, in August in which a counter-demonstrator was killed.

New York Times national editor Marc Lacy explained the newspaper's reasoning in publishing the article following sharply critical feedback from readers, which included questioning why there were not more attempts by the reporter to push back as Hovater expressed his radical views.

Lacy acknowledged that many readers found the story offensive, especially citing what they considered the normalizing of neo-Nazi views and behavior, but Lacey insisted that "the point of the story was not to normalize anything but to describe the degree to which hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think."

He added that "Our reporter and his editors agonized over the tone and content of the article," and pointed out that Hovater was clearly described as a bigot "who posted images on Facebook of a Nazi-like America full of happy white people and swastikas everywhere."

"We regret the degree to which the piece offended so many readers," Lacy wrote. "We recognize that people can disagree on how best to tell a disagreeable story. What we think is indisputable, though, is the need to shed more light, not less, on the most extreme corners of American life and the people who inhabit them. That’s what the story, however imperfectly, tried to do."