3 ms·
Not a fan of Trump's policies, actions or attitudes here, but this 'article' wasn't much more than a series of rumours, guesses and third had accounts gathered
by cyberferret 10y ago
Not a fan of Trump's policies, actions or attitudes here, but this 'article' wasn't much more than a series of rumours, guesses and third had accounts gathered together on one page. One could infer many things from this story, and that does a disservice to the journalism profession.
If providers are serious about stamping out the constant cries of 'fake news', I would like to think that articles be more well researched, and solid & verifiable proof of evidence is found, and presented in a way that cannot be refuted or challenged.
- simplicio 10y agoReally? Other than two sentences from an anonymous source, everything in the article is verifiable. The story itself is fairly opaque, but then that's what the article is reporting, that it isn't clear why the CISO left, and that neither the WH or the man himself will comment. They don't offer any guesses, and even the headline stresses that they don't know.