Argyll's online broadsheet.

“In each case we are satisfied that the …

Comment posted Porkwatch: Why is Connel to get ‘a big new school’ or is the election bacon in the pan? by Simon.

“In each case we are satisfied that the sources are authoritative.” – Yeah???

What happened to your authoritative source on the Dunoon Observer story?

Let me guess – you just adopted the ‘publish and be dammned’ approach. Only to retract when you eventually found the email from their lawyers…. 😉

Simon also commented

  • Intersting post Newsie – dedicated it seems to making points that no one raised and answering questions that no one asked. A bit like a record stuck in a groove. 🙂
  • I see from today’s Oban Times that Achaleven school is to re-open!! And not a word from ‘For Argyll’ about this!

    Finger on the pulse?? Ahem, recent events would suggest not….

    But just to save Newsie, “doc”, Crazy, Robert et al the bother I’ll tell you shall I who made the announcement that Achaleven was re-opening? (Just a year after it was mothballed and some six months since Newsie (above)poured scorn on the very idea of it re-opening) It was none other than the Prince of Darkness himself – the hater of all of all things rural – especially rural schools – it was none other than Cleland Sneddon….

    If you want to read more about it – then you best buy the Oban Times – ’cause you will find nary a mention of it on here… 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

  • Newsie – quite frankly I find your ‘explanation’ preposterous!
    Are you seriously asking readers on here to believe that “the bullying culture” you ascribe to the Council is so “very powerful” that not one indivudual member of Connel Community Council or the Community Council collectively and as a statutory body is prepared to put its head above the parapet and say that ‘Cllr McIntyre said this’?
    And as far as your belated and inadequate ‘explanations’ of your £200 million for Health Service article are comncerned – even you can copy press releases – but try reading the comments and you will see several posters ‘correcting’ more of your errors/lies/mistakes/muddled reporting…..
  • In the past couple of days the ‘Newsieums’ ie the monotonous “‘We have heard’ ‘We understand’ ‘have had reports’ etc etc” have been out in force both in this article and in the ‘Campobeltown Ring and Ride Service article. Unattributable sources (wink, wink). In addition, Newsie has made a real dog’s breakfast with blatant errors, lies and muddled reporting in the £200 million for Health Service in Scotland article.
    Hardly surprising that we now begin to see calls for more balance and accuracy in the FA articles.
    The poor excuse “We use the formula: ‘We understand…’ it means we have authoritative sources who do not wish to be quoted.” – sounds good but as Interested Bystander points out in the case of the Dunoon Observer your “we understand” article attracted loads of posts – and ultimately a lawyers letter. How good was your “authoritative source” then? As good as the sources for the Connel article? Better? Worse?
    Merely repeating innuendo, rumour and hearsay is never going to be good journalism no matter how often you try it.

Recent comments by Simon

powered by SEO Super Comments

· · · · · · · ·

Related Articles & Comments