> What would you say instead, if you thought something from
> history was improbable? Would you say it happened, or
> didn’t happen? Or would you qualify your statement
> somehow?
OK, you don’t understand what journalism is supposed to be.
Neither does much of anybody else these days.
You see, as a reporter, it’s not supposed matter what *I* think. That’s the place for an editorial.
As a reporter, I would simply report what different factions SAY about an historical event, with as much balance as possible, and leave my bloody opinion out of it.
As a reporter, I could say something such as, “The prevailing opinion among authorities with whom this reporter spoke is that this event took place as described in the original account.”
I could then get into the details of differing points of view, their sources, and their background.
But I must never, as a RESPONSIBLE journalist, impose my own opinion on the report.
OK. We know what you could say, what would you say?
It’s regrettable that, by and large, journalists abandoned the respectable code of intellectual honesty and journalistic integrity.