On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 12:00:56 -0700, "Matthew Brown" <morven(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Personally, that's my question as well. BLP
started off as 'we should
be strict about having good sources for negative stuff'. But that
doesn't get rid of all negative stuff, as is the case here. We have a
rather negative and salacious story that comes from a legitimate print
newspaper source.
It all tracks back to a single paper, which very clearly has it in for
the subject. If other papers had *independently* come to the same
conclusion, then I would have simply ignored it (after checking that
the cites were good, of course). This could be the work of one
journalist, or one editor with a grudge. Or it could be genuinely
significant, but he is such a minor figure that nobody else cared. My
big problem is, though, that it all originates from that one local
paper, the tone of whose coverage is very much that of a witch-hunt.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG