2 ms·

Good thing that's not what I said, then.

• lutze 14y ago
  Your comment seemed quite sarcastic, and looked to be trying to equivocate responsibility. Not that I'm above using sarcasm myself, obviously. The fact is, that in this instance, a Murdoch owned media company is clearly distorting the truth to further a political agenda. So in this instance, it is perfectly reasonable to criticise Murdoch in particular, without having to resort to qualifications. In my opinion of course.
  • mseebach 14y ago
    You implied causation between working for a Murdoch-owned media outlet and writing a column with a light take on the facts. That's fallacious, and that's why I called it out.
    • lutze 14y ago
      No, I implied causation between working for a Murdoch owned media outlet and writing a column furthering a specific political agenda. The lying part is incidental really.