Replies

If Spiff (hehe) is wrong, little harm has been done. If he's right, this is important information.

That's an interesting comment. I bet freepers would go ballistic if, say the editor of one of the big daily newspapers said that about one of their reports.

If Spiff (hehe) is wrong, little harm has been done. If he's right, this is important information.

That's an interesting comment. I bet freepers would go ballistic if, say the editor of one of the big daily newspapers said that about one of their reports.

You miss the point. Spiff is not an editor of a major newspaper (at least I don't think he is). The point he made is that he thought the information should be passed along to someone who is involved in investigative journalism. Confirmation, sources, etc. would be the responsibility of the reporting agency. Spiff is just a "tip".

Which raises another question. Do you actually believe that the editors of major newspapers report factual information with adequate sources on a regular basis?

That's an interesting comment. I bet freepers would go ballistic if, say the editor of one of the big daily newspapers said that about one of their reports.

I understand your skepticism of his sources and I won't repeat the points a couple of other Freepers made about spiff not being a news editor. Here's a thread I would point you to (you've probably already seen it)- Earth 'will expire by 2050'.

Now my point is this- The Guardian, a UK paper read and widely respected by British lefties (and American ones as well) is crying gloom and doom over a report put out by the WWF. The WWF is hardly what I would call a credible source and their claims have been debunked again and again. Yet the Guardian posts this as the gospel truth without citing any references or real science to back it up. This is sensationalism at its finest and is not even above the National Enquirer. If the Guardian can do it and have the leftist hoardes cheering it own because it furthers their socialist agenda then I would reckon it's ok for spiff to give the members of an online political forum an exclusive account of an interesting item even if the sources are as dubious as those of the Guardian.

I agree with another poster- this is what a journalist would call a hot tip and we've just been made privy to the process- no harm there.