Like my friend said, dropping too much information risks offended family, friends, and fans.
Looking at the structure of the article, it starts off saying he had long-term drug problems, his last major success was a while ago (STP reunion), and he was found dead.
It first mentions his paranoia and mania as a result of bipolar disorder. Then it backs that up by describing out of character behavior for him last spring, the meet and greet stuff, the reporter issue. Then it describes how Jamie saw it early on and they figured it out. However, it reared its ugly head again last spring, which takes us back to the things described before, but also the viral Vasoline video which opened up his problem again very publicly. But then it mentions how they got him treatment and it was like 'night and day.'
In other words, I don't think it was gratuitous. It was to show that his disorder could be very destructive, both publicly and privately, but when he received proper treatment, he was better. Then it goes on to say that underneath this all were the problems with his ex-wife and kids, and then the cancer diagnosis of both his mom and birth father. THEN it turns out he has Hepatitis-C, which is yet another thing he is battling, along with cocaine and alcohol (and what no one mentions, smoking, which is horrible for the body).
So at that point the question might be 'Why the fuck was he on tour?' Well, that was answered. He was broke.
Yeah, the Steve Stewart quote might have been superfluous, but the writer seemed to take the course of 'he was suffering from addiction way more than he was sober,' though I would admit I would like to have read a really cool story about him while sober to contrast with that story.
The rest of the story I don't think anyone has a problem with. I agree in some respects, but I don't think overall it is an article that egregiously dismisses journalistic integrity and I am inclined to agree that if Mary didn't want to talk to the writer, it's possible the writer had no idea about the other service.