4 ms·
You should read a tabloid sometime for fun. They really tread a fine line with how they "fabricate" their stories. They wont flat out say "ABC did XYZ". They us
by digler999 10y ago
You should read a tabloid sometime for fun. They really tread a fine line with how they "fabricate" their stories. They wont flat out say "ABC did XYZ". They use tons of weasel words and passive voice to avoid technically saying something untrue or provably false.
* lie: ABC did XYZ
* weasel: ABC *caught up in* XYZ affair.
* weasel: Many people believe ABC did XYZ.
* weasel: Sources familiar with XYZ *are hinting at* ABC's involvement.
* weasel: ABC denies XYZ scandal.
* weasel: source at the scene of XYZ may have seen ABC.
* weasel: ABC's silence about XYZ hints possible involvement.
* weasel: ABC *breaks his/her silence* about XYZ. (my all-time favorite)
* weasel: ABC *was investigated for* XYZ involvement.
* weasel: ABC explains his involvement in XYZ. { but it wasn't XYZ, it was an XYZ-*like* event from 3-decades ago }.
- vanderZwan 10y agoSee also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_v._Eiland-Hall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_v._Eiland-Hall
- SCHiM 10y agoWow that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I don't know any of the people involved, and I don't remember this. But reading the first few paragraphs have me siding with Glenn. Without taking into account the actual contents of the website, the domain name is more an accusation and assertion than 'satirical comedy'. If this were to happen to me I'd be trying everything I could to get it removed too.
- vanderZwan 10y ago> I don't know any of the people involved, and I don't remember this. But reading the first few paragraphs have me siding with Glenn. Well, that might explain why you side with Glenn, since he's guilty of tactics like this himself. Which is exactly why the website was set up.