Why isn't Manny suing Tim Smith along with Mayweather and everyone else named in the defamation suit. Surely a story getting coverage in a national coverage does at the very least as much harm (likely much mcuh more) than Mayweather running his mouth??
Pacquiao visited Tim Smith's office (email accuser), Smith was nowhere to be found?
Collapse
-
-
I don't know what I'm doing awake at this hour explaining this, but:
If someone you know and trust has a history of giving you credible information, then yeah, you can sometimes go on their word. Especially if a track record precedes it. That said, who is to say that he wasn't shown "hard proof" as you call it?
I certainly don't reveal all of the information given to me, so as to protect sources.
Maybe its because you are awake at an hour when you should be asleep that you are spouting such nonsense.
Going with information from a "credible" source WITHOUT HARD EVIDENCE, especially when it results in sullying a person's integrity is just plain ******. If you're going to report on something against a public figure which could affect that individual's name, you better be damn sure you got the goods on him. That is just plain common sense and not something i should be explaining to someone like you.
And i know that there never was any hard proof in the first place nor was he given (or shown) any because if there really was an email, it would have surfaced months ago.
Oh, and you are not supposed to reveal the source of your information. "Proof" of your allegations is a totally different thing entirely.
In this particular case, you don't have to tell anyone who told you about the email. But you have to at least have a printout of the "alleged" email as proof of your allegations.
There is a word to describe spreading information about someone without any proof whatsoever, just because you got it from a "credible" source.
its GOSSIP.Last edited by AFighter4U; 02-15-2011, 08:52 AM.Comment
-
Good question check.Comment
-
Then you are simply an idiot.
Maybe its because you are awake at an hour when you should be asleep that you are spouting such nonsense.
Going with information from a "credible" source WITHOUT HARD EVIDENCE, especially when it results in sullying a person's integrity is just plain ******. If you're going to report on something against a public figure which could affect that individual's name, you better be damn sure you got the goods on him. That is just plain common sense and not something i should be explaining to someone like you.
And i know that there never was any hard proof in the first place nor was he given (or shown) any because if there really was an email, it would have surfaced months ago.
Oh, and you are not supposed to reveal the source of your information. "Proof" of your allegations is a totally different thing entirely.
In this particular case, you don't have to tell anyone who told you about the email. But you have to at least have a printout of the "alleged" email as proof of your allegations.
There is a word to describe spreading information about someone without any proof whatsoever, just because you got it from a "credible" source.
its GOSSIP.Comment
-
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
You all remember Tim Smith right, the NY Daily News boxing scribe who accused Pacquiao about the alleged emails leakage regarding drug testing results...
Pacquiao visited the Daily News office in NYC but how come Timmy was nowhere to be found? I think he may be one of the few boxing scribes in that newspaper (aside from our own Ryan ********).
Comment
Comment