| reply to jester121
Re: Tainted "journalism" what do you expect? opinion seperated from fact in an article at dslreports? |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | said by cornelius785:what do you expect? opinion seperated from fact in an article at dslreports? That several "ISPs Won't Admit Participation In New RIAA Plan" is a fact, not an opinion. Do you see the irony in your insinuation and attack on the messenger? |
|
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by jmn1207:said by cornelius785:what do you expect? opinion seperated from fact in an article at dslreports? That several "ISPs Won't Admit Participation In New RIAA Plan" is a fact, not an opinion. Do you see the irony in your insinuation and attack on the messenger? Even better is to summarize the situation as "ISPs other than Verizon refuse to deny Participation In New RIAA Plan" since this is what the article says. The same set of facts can be presented/viewed in a number of ways without omitting anything in your statement of the situation. Part of it is how you want to "spin" the facts (ignoring that spinning often requires suppression of facts that rebut your intended slant). |
|
jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | I just don't see how any ISP's silence can come across as anything positive. How do you spin it to make the ISP's look consumer-centric?
OJ won't admit that he murdered Nicole.
OJ refuses to deny his involvement in Nicole's murder.
OJ remains tight-lipped while Nicole remains headless.
I can't make it work so that OJ's silence does anything other than bring suspicion upon himself.
If OJ officially stated that he did not murder Nicole, while it may not prove his innocence, if reported factually, it could not be implied or interpreted that he was guilty. |
|
