Current version

Posted May 16, 2018 03:05 · last edited March 18, 2021 07:34

The club have been repeating over and over again that they're not going to reply to wild speculation in the papers. They released something on Saturday knocking back certain pieces of wild speculation which had also been printed in the paper, and it didn't help. They're trapped in the chasm between "if they don't deny it, it's true" and "if they do deny it, it's probably still true".

Perhaps this is my academic background, but I don't accept any story as fact without sources. Accepting stuff because (as james dean said) "it makes sense" or "it's got a lot of details" is precisely how people fall for propaganda.

Previous versions

2 versions
Unknown editor edited March 18, 2021 07:34

The club have been repeating over and over again that they're not going to reply to wild speculation in the papers. They released something on Saturday knocking back certain pieces of wild speculation which had also been printed in the paper, and it didn't help. They're trapped in the chasm between "if they don't deny it, it's true" and "if they do deny it, it's probably still true".

Perhaps this is my academic background, but I don't accept any story as fact without sources. Accepting stuff because (as james dean said) "it makes sense" or "it's got a lot of details" is precisely how people fall for propaganda.

Unknown editor edited May 16, 2018 03:05

The club have been repeating over and over again that they're not going to reply to wild speculation in the papers. They released something on Saturday knocking back certain pieces of wild speculation which had also been printed in the paper.

They're trapped in the chasm between "if they don't deny it, it's true" and "if they do deny it, it's probably still true". Perhaps this is my academic background, but I don't accept any story as fact without sources. Accepting stuff because (as james dean said) "it makes sense" or "it's got a lot of details" is precisely how people fall for propaganda.