> the only way a messanger is wrong is if they send the wrong message. Well, if a messenger carries a message that he or she knows or should know is incorrect,

> the only way a messanger is wrong is if they send the wrong message. Well, if a messenger carries a message that he or she knows or should know is incorrect, illegal, or lacks crucial context or qualification, there's a problem there. The message might be "correct" in that it is an accurate word-for-word transmission of what the message's author said, but the message could still "wrong" in other senses of the word. Sometimes we just want accurate transmission of content, e.g., with a phone call. In other contexts (scientific, legal, journalistic, political) we expect broadcasters of messages to exercise some responsibility over what and how they say things. > no subjective take can truly be "wrong" No one wants to live in a world where everyone believes this. Have you ever been mugged? I have. Being tackled and having my wallet stolen was "truly wrong." I am not interested in political or sociological arguments to the contrary.