Aren't I? Do I? Am I? Ok. Ok.
Johann Hari admits copying and pasting interview quotes
- Thread starter butchersapron
- Start date
Jesus, so anyone who's not frothing at the mouth over this is a tory? You need to get out more.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that you don't know what happened/haven't bothered to find out (evidenced throughout your posts) And that this lazy hey he's on our side man marks you down ad a lib-dem voter. When allied with your belief that you're hard faced and cynical i think this marks you as the classic anarchist lib-dem. A laughing stock.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I was mortified to find out that i'd done this over 10 years. I don't do that.
Even the apology is a lie about what he actually did.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
genuis (being suitably mortified when it emerged that it had been you doing it, like some posh hound )
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
"some defenders of the powerful people I had taken on over the years for their wrongdoing saw an opportunity to try to discredit what I had written about them"
No they didn't. You got nailed by the left. The right were siting by picking up breadcrumbs. You lie.
No they didn't. You got nailed by the left. The right were siting by picking up breadcrumbs. You lie.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You don't know what a free kick is and you decided to just smear everyone as making untrue statements. Why? What statements were true and what not? All the ones i've seen are unanswerable. Why try to smear them with (unstated) lies by association?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Apology? He's just told us all to fuck off and say thank you at the same time.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Read the thread! Stuff that people were loathe to print its more going to done out.
Wrong again. For someone who holds others to such high standards of account you don't half talk a load of assumptive shite.
gosub
~#
Interesting bit in the New Staetsman by the JackofKent blogger. Turns out one of the reasons this went on for so long was Mr Hari's willingness to sue for deformation people whom raised it. I'm not sure how that tallies with " I believe that every time you point out that somebody is going wrong, you give them a chance to get it right next time and so reduce the amount of wrongdoing in the world."
Be interesting to see what those on the wrong side of David Rose, now they have an identity to persue through the courts, do now
Be interesting to see what those on the wrong side of David Rose, now they have an identity to persue through the courts, do now
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
'sue for deformation'
the elephant man's first lawsuit
the elephant man's first lawsuit
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
i find being mortified by one's own behaviour rather chucklesome.
another reason to flee the country post-haste.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
he just can't help himself:
http://themediablog.typepad.com/the-media-blog/2011/09/johann-hari-quotes.html
http://themediablog.typepad.com/the-media-blog/2011/09/johann-hari-quotes.html
But he isn't contradicting himself; look:
He is referring to two completely different groups of people: 1) his work mates who perhaps don't interview people as part of their work and and 2) interviewers from rival papers. Further, in the September quote he speculates on what his colleagues would have said whilst in the June quote he states what hacks from other papers did say to him.
Whoever writes that blog is either disingenuous or dumb.
What makes Hari look like an idiot there is that he needs to ask people something that should be common bloody sense; and certainly something that someone who writes for a living ought to know.
Well what's wrong with 'stating' something that was indeed stated? I suppose he could be lying but I'm not furnished with the details of what private conversations he's had with other people in the industry so have to take it at face value. The blog is framed that he is contradicting himself, but he isn't.
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
So 'people who don't interview' are the ones he should have listened to? The Indy is notoriously short of proper journalists, so who are these otehr papers, who have even worse ones? I think he's probably making stuff up again, about having contacted other papers, implying that he talked to several people at several papers.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Take hari at face value?
He is talking about two separate things - one speculation the other not - involving two different sets of people. This is desperate bottom of the barrel stuff. There's enough to criticise him for without weakening your position by this piss poor stuff.
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
I've not got a position, really, I'm just idly guessing.
Edit: unless you're referring to my position that Hari is a tremendous liar, and I don't think anything can 'weaken' reality.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Both articles linked to on this thread...Well, quite.But best to have evidence for stuff, no?
So I'm in the wrong? I only know what it says in those quotes on the blog. And from that he isn't contradicting himself. If there's more to it then the blogger should illustrate that because as it stands it looks disingenuous.
love detective
there's no love too small
it's not clear that he's not contradicting himself either though is it
Interviewers for British newspapers could well include the sub-set who were experienced journalists at the Independent
Also if he's not contradicting himself - what basis does he have to speculate that his experienced colleagues at the Independent would frown upon it, when he himself has actually spoken to Interviewers at British newspapers who have confirmed to him that it is normal practice? Surely based on the evidence he's actually collected from Interviewers at British newspapers he should be speculating that his experienced colleagues at the Independent would also view it as normal practice no?
Interviewers for British newspapers could well include the sub-set who were experienced journalists at the Independent
Also if he's not contradicting himself - what basis does he have to speculate that his experienced colleagues at the Independent would frown upon it, when he himself has actually spoken to Interviewers at British newspapers who have confirmed to him that it is normal practice? Surely based on the evidence he's actually collected from Interviewers at British newspapers he should be speculating that his experienced colleagues at the Independent would also view it as normal practice no?
Similar threads
