Point of clarification regarding the procedural posture of that lawsuit, in case anyone cares. The lawsuit was never truly dismissed to start out with. WaPo's attorneys had filed a "demurrer," which is a facial challenge to the allegations in the complaint. This type of motion involves no submitted evidence. A demurrer basically says, even if everything in the complaint is true, there is no legal cause of action. When demurrers are granted, in virtually every case, the plaintiff is permitted to amend the complaint (it's called dismissed with leave to amend), after which there could be a second demurrer, a third, and so on.
The judge here is permitting the case to go forward only in regard to three particular statements in the WaPo coverage. We'll find out later after discovery when WaPo will undoubtedly file a motion for summary judgment if the case will be allowed to go to a jury.
A plaintiff merely getting past the pleading stage and being allowed to pursue discovery is pretty meaningless. There are very few cases where it doesn't happen.