1. the "update" on this story seems to abdicate journalistic responsibility:http://canadalandshow.com/article/walrus-violated-charity-rules-says-magazines-co-founder …
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
2. You have a source making a claim & another source comes in to dispute and provides counter-evidence. Your duty is to evaluate, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
3. To simply provide the two sides & throw up you hands in a matter of factual dispute seems like reneging of responsibility
1 reply 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @JesseBrown
@HeerJeet his claim wasn't about CCAB audit numbers, which didn't exist at the meeting in question (for the time period in question.) 2/41 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JesseBrown
@HeerJeet his claim was that Ambrose presented numbers that didn't square with the reality of what was known at the time. 3/41 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @JesseBrown
@HeerJeet Unless Ambrose/Walrus responds, all we have are Ken's claims and CCAB#s that came later (& which IMO he credibly challenges) 4/43 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@JesseBrown As a reader, not clear why audit numbers less trustworthy than Alexander's say so. We're just given 2 conflicting facts.
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.