emptywheel

You are being disingenuous now. The tweet this referred to suggested that we created a story in order to write about it. That’s not what happened.

Sheera: The NYT stories, plural, are being broadly picked up and sowing more and more misunderstanding. Do you bear absolutely no responsibility for the things you deem to hold FB responsible for? Zero? NYT is above all that?

Again, reading his tweets, he specifically cites ads. Hence the points I made in my story. You wrote “Goldman was addressing all of IRA’s activity on Facebook.” I just don’t understand how you came to that conclusion.

HELLOOO. You still don't even understand the basic point. You are doing precisely what you accused him of. The indictment is ALSO not all the ads, and yet you treat it as if it is.

I’m replying politely and you are not giving me the same courtesy. My story is about Goldman’s tweets alone, not the broader indictment. You draw conclusions about what e was referencing that I do not. He tweeted about FB ads- so I addressed that in my story.

"Polite" would be reviewing what I've written, rather than to keep insisting that you made no errors. Or just say LALALALALA.

I reviewed what you’ve written, and am now responding. Politely.

Ok. Let's start here: Why does your "fact-check" say that an anti-Islamic event that doesn't mention Hillary was about Hillary?