Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
If I want to tell you something important, it will be more accurate if I tell you directly rather than going through a 3rd party, especially one who is opposed to me. Then you can judge my words knowing that they came directly from me, and they haven't been altered in any way.

Well, I get that ;)

But what if you are lying, or it became abundantly clear that previously you had lied in a direct communique?
Now what do I believe?!

Does an untruth/distortion from the horses mouth (in order to convey a particular viewpoint) have any more merit than an untruth/distortion processed through a media outlet (in order to convey a particular viewpoint)?

Perhaps the media outlet has to take a little more care to avoid litigation even.
The horses mouth might be able to say whatever it wants - on behalf of itself.

I'm sure that the use of Social Media its a fascinating about turn in the world of politics - even if some of the early adopters often sound like petulant brats rather than statespersons - but I also suspect that 'trump' trumping off directly via Twitter is not exactly the the way, the truth and the light.

Multiple flavours of bullsh1t - direct and indirect?
(yeah i know .. there's a bigger picture behind it all ;) )