It's an imperfect story, but a lot of the logic the people are using to refute it is bullshit too. Like the "disgruntled players" excuse. Of course your information comes from "disgruntled" players. Players who are happy with the system have absolutely nothing to gain from reporting on it. The "biased reporter" excuse isnt a be-all, end-all either. Bias is important to take into consideration, but it is not your carte blanche to write off any facts that you don't like.
SI's claim that the story had dozens of sources who independently described the same situation hasn't been refuted. They obviously didn't fact check all of what they were told, and that is certainly a concern. The important question to ask is whether the the lack of fact checking was so pervasive and significant that it undermines the substance of the entire story. In this case, I would say that it's not even close. It least not yet. If you find two flaws in an article that makes 50 claims, you don't get to automatically write off the other 48 as being completely fabricated.
SI's claim that the story had dozens of sources who independently described the same situation hasn't been refuted. They obviously didn't fact check all of what they were told, and that is certainly a concern. The important question to ask is whether the the lack of fact checking was so pervasive and significant that it undermines the substance of the entire story. In this case, I would say that it's not even close. It least not yet. If you find two flaws in an article that makes 50 claims, you don't get to automatically write off the other 48 as being completely fabricated.
Comment