I'm not much of a fan of Allen, and think he might have a few skeletons in the closet. But this article's headline is outrageously misleading. Just shows that no one, not even the laudably "impartial" BBC, is immune to the virulent hyperpartisanship that is now epidemic.https://twitter.com/BBCWorld/status/919483804670193664 …
Exactly. Now, after reading that and the following paragraph, can't you see that reducing everything he said to "Allen is sad for Weinstein" would be a bit misleading?
-
-
No. The news here is that Allen would pipe up in this debate. I really don't see it. They could have made the headlines worse.
-
If you don't see it, that's on you, not me. It's clear as day that the headline writer misrepresents what Allen said. The fact that they could have made the headline worse doesn't excuse the fact that it is terrible.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.