Arggh!
Ok, allow me to point out three errors, imho
1) Describing E.T. as "Horrible, Horrible" - No. Not even close. I could name 50-100 games on the 2600 alone that are worse. And while some reviews when it came out gave it poor scores, it also got good reviews too. If they would have prefaced this statement "many believe", I'd be ok with that, but they stated it as fact.
2) Calling the game a retail "Flop" - It was a TOP TEN SELLER on a system with hundreds of game. That is not a flop. The decision to overproduce the game was a very foolish decision. If they decided to start out only producing a million copies to begin with (which would have been a lot at the time), it would've sold out and been considered a huge hit.
3) Atari programmers making bad games helped cause the decline of Atari - Really. Name five. E.T. was one of the earliest silver box games and a lot of those games are some of the best of the system. Yes, third parties were making bad game, but don't blame them or the programmers at Atari for Atari nosediving as far as business goes. Blame the business decisions they made, including overpaying for the E.T. licenses and over producing games beyond realistic expectations.
With that being said, I recall HSW becoming a counselor, but I didn't realize he lost all of his ET money and was able to use his high/low life experiences to help others. Good stuff.
Also, I think HSW knows it isn't as bad as it's reputation, but enjoys the notoriety that ET being labeled the worst game of all time brings. It gives him a ton of opportunities to talk about the past, which without ET, he may never have today. How many other Atari programmers do you know still get mainstream coverage like this?