On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 12:00:56 -0700, "Matthew Brown" morven@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)