4 ms·
> This is a failure across many journalists Only one journalist was involved here. I think you meant "failing of many journalists" not "failure across many".
by IncRnd 4y ago
> This is a failure across many journalists
Only one journalist was involved here. I think you meant "failing of many journalists" not "failure across many".
> The amount of scrutiny applied to a source is inversely proportional with how much I want to believe the source.
Why do you disbelieve a source that has been greatly scrutinized? Did you mean "directly proportional"?
- andrewaylett 4y agoThe sense I read from the GP is that if I want to believe the source, I'm less likely to apply strict scrutiny to what they tell me. The more I want to believe, the less I'll dig into what I'm hearing. Some things are just too good to not believe.
- bombcar 4y agoExactly. Krebs did it himself (doubling down on his "source" even as evidence began to come to light that the source was not clean) and we as commentators do also (the original posts are filled with "the software sucks because of X, Y, and Z so this is obviously true).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]