> "ZH focuses on facts". Seriously? Seriously, they do. They spin them in weird ways, though - I remember in 2007 (or early 2008), they had an article about "t

> "ZH focuses on facts". Seriously? Seriously, they do. They spin them in weird ways, though - I remember in 2007 (or early 2008), they had an article about "the bin laden trade" - someone bet $30M or so on a very improbably collapse -- Or so the article inferred based on highly irregular "put" purchase -- losing $30M if that didn't happen, or winning billions if it did. The data was, in fact, factual. However, they failed to account for alternative explanations, e.g. that someone (probably a pension fund or a hedge fund) was moving a lot of money into the market, and was buying insurance -- a much more likely explanation for the same data. They do stick to facts. It's their analysis that you should reserve your skepticism to.