Why is she saying this and putting Woodward in the discussion like he’s one of their peers?

Woodward book mostly builds on real-time reporting, as Wolff and Omarosa books did. Woodward book doesn’t add to the broader understanding of this presidency - but it tells a consistent story, as did the others.

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) September 4, 2018

Is she implying something about herself and her work?

Is she a book critic? I’m confused.