On 29/03/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/03/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
Maybe. If it's judged significant. Which, in this case, it clearly is not, since nobody else seems to be running with it. Have you read their follow-up stories? It looks *awfully* like a vendetta.
This argument is not valid. Significance of a particular item of information cannot be judged based upon the number of papers which run with the story.
Indeed. Anyone with any experience of the media echo chamber would find this argument ludicrous. The papers reprint and expand each others' errors *all the time*.
- d.