Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

Excuse me!

I just said that I am not certain of the presence of a media release. I said there were 2 possibilities.

It is you who is certain, but you lack the evidence and proof.

What is certain, is that the BBC contacted the Commission and obtained the quotes they had in the article they wrote. That is obvious.

Like it is obvious, that the BBC didn't fuck up like the Cyprus Mail and publish utter stupidity!

Wow!

Oh good grief!

So your counter claim is that the BBC sent a reporter to the Zenobia for this event then?

Because they never, never ever print anything from a press release?

So when they heard that some 95 year old bloke was going to do a dive in Larnaca they sent a reporter and a photographer to the dive site, took pictures interviews and everything... then back to the UK and published it... Is that it? Do you really believe that? Do you really believe that you can convince anybody of that?

Or, is it as I said from the very start, the story came from a press release, the CM edited it clumsily (as did some other sites actually) but the BBC did not. In fact, neither the BBC nor the Cyprus Mail not any other of the media sites that reported the event and published the picture knew anything about it until the press release arrived?

No!I leave all the claims to you.

The BBC were astute enough to make the correction. There is no evidence they called anyone in this article, but they knew enough to correct the article.

[cyprusgrump]

Excuse me!

I just said that I am not certain of the presence of a media release. I said there were 2 possibilities.

It is you who is certain, but you lack the evidence and proof.

What is certain, is that the BBC contacted the Commission and obtained the quotes they had in the article they wrote. That is obvious.

Like it is obvious, that the BBC didn't fuck up like the Cyprus Mail and publish utter stupidity!

Wow!

Oh good grief!

So your counter claim is that the BBC sent a reporter to the Zenobia for this event then?

Because they never, never ever print anything from a press release?

So when they heard that some 95 year old bloke was going to do a dive in Larnaca they sent a reporter and a photographer to the dive site, took pictures interviews and everything... then back to the UK and published it... Is that it? Do you really believe that? Do you really believe that you can convince anybody of that?

Or, is it as I said from the very start, the story came from a press release, the CM edited it clumsily (as did some other sites actually) but the BBC did not. In fact, neither the BBC nor the Cyprus Mail not any other of the media sites that reported the event and published the picture knew anything about it until the press release arrived?

No!I leave all the claims to you.

The BBC were astute enough to make the correction. There is no evidence they called anyone in this article, but they knew enough to correct the article.

So you agree that they didn't call anybody, they just published a press release on faith...?

So as far as the BBC knew the guy could have been 45 not 95 and he might have gone to 4m not 41m and he might have gone for 5mins not 44mins...?

But you stand by your claim that publishing that press release without verifying the facts is on par with the standards required in the aviation industry right?

[Paphitis]

Excuse me!

I just said that I am not certain of the presence of a media release. I said there were 2 possibilities.

It is you who is certain, but you lack the evidence and proof.

What is certain, is that the BBC contacted the Commission and obtained the quotes they had in the article they wrote. That is obvious.

Like it is obvious, that the BBC didn't fuck up like the Cyprus Mail and publish utter stupidity!

Wow!

Oh good grief!

So your counter claim is that the BBC sent a reporter to the Zenobia for this event then?

Because they never, never ever print anything from a press release?

So when they heard that some 95 year old bloke was going to do a dive in Larnaca they sent a reporter and a photographer to the dive site, took pictures interviews and everything... then back to the UK and published it... Is that it? Do you really believe that? Do you really believe that you can convince anybody of that?

Or, is it as I said from the very start, the story came from a press release, the CM edited it clumsily (as did some other sites actually) but the BBC did not. In fact, neither the BBC nor the Cyprus Mail not any other of the media sites that reported the event and published the picture knew anything about it until the press release arrived?

No!I leave all the claims to you.

The BBC were astute enough to make the correction. There is no evidence they called anyone in this article, but they knew enough to correct the article.

So you agree that they didn't call anybody, they just published a press release on faith...?

So as far as the BBC knew the guy could have been 45 not 95 and he might have gone to 4m not 41m and he might have gone for 5mins not 44mins...?

But you stand by your claim that publishing that press release without verifying the facts is on par with the standards required in the aviation industry right?

No I don't agree to that because you can't be sure. You are making assumptions.

What I know is that the BBC didn't get it wrong. How that occurred is unknown to me.

Maybe they did make a phone call. You, know ring ring!

Or maybe their travel editor is a diver?

[cyprusgrump]

Excuse me!

I just said that I am not certain of the presence of a media release. I said there were 2 possibilities.

It is you who is certain, but you lack the evidence and proof.

What is certain, is that the BBC contacted the Commission and obtained the quotes they had in the article they wrote. That is obvious.

Like it is obvious, that the BBC didn't fuck up like the Cyprus Mail and publish utter stupidity!

Wow!

Oh good grief!

So your counter claim is that the BBC sent a reporter to the Zenobia for this event then?

Because they never, never ever print anything from a press release?

So when they heard that some 95 year old bloke was going to do a dive in Larnaca they sent a reporter and a photographer to the dive site, took pictures interviews and everything... then back to the UK and published it... Is that it? Do you really believe that? Do you really believe that you can convince anybody of that?

Or, is it as I said from the very start, the story came from a press release, the CM edited it clumsily (as did some other sites actually) but the BBC did not. In fact, neither the BBC nor the Cyprus Mail not any other of the media sites that reported the event and published the picture knew anything about it until the press release arrived?

No!I leave all the claims to you.

The BBC were astute enough to make the correction. There is no evidence they called anyone in this article, but they knew enough to correct the article.

So you agree that they didn't call anybody, they just published a press release on faith...?

So as far as the BBC knew the guy could have been 45 not 95 and he might have gone to 4m not 41m and he might have gone for 5mins not 44mins...?

But you stand by your claim that publishing that press release without verifying the facts is on par with the standards required in the aviation industry right?

No I don't agree to that because you can't be sure. You are making assumptions.

What I know is that the BBC didn't get it wrong. How that occurred is unknown to me.

Maybe they did make a phone call. You, know ring ring!

Or maybe their travel editor is a diver?

Or perhaps their gambling addiction editor is a diver...

...because what is clear is that the BBC is happy to publish any old stuff from a press release to fill their website...

And remember who it was that insisted the BBC didn't publish press releases...

[Paphitis]

Or perhaps their gambling addiction editor is a diver...

...because what is clear is that the BBC is happy to publish any old stuff from a press release to fill their website...

And remember who it was that insisted the BBC didn't publish press releases...

It was I that told you that MSM do not publish media releases.

And that gambling story was so obviously not a media release.

[cyprusgrump]

Or perhaps their gambling addiction editor is a diver...

...because what is clear is that the BBC is happy to publish any old stuff from a press release to fill their website...

And remember who it was that insisted the BBC didn't publish press releases...

It was I that told you that MSM do not publish media releases.

And that gambling story was so obviously not a media release.

You are arguing black is white and white is black again!

The very fact that the BBC had the diving story with the same headline as hundreds of other outlets proves it came from a PR.

The very fact that the BBC had the same gambling story with the same headline as hundreds of other outlets proves it came from a PR.

You are just in denial... you really will argue black is white forever won't you...?

[Paphitis]

No I am not. I am just stating the obvious.

The CM article was inaccurate nonsense.

The gambling article was not a media release.

[cyprusgrump]

No I am not. I am just stating the obvious.

The CM article was inaccurate nonsense.

The gambling article was not a media release.

Wrong on both counts...

But then just about everything you post is wrong.

And ignoring those that prove you wrong with links and facts doesn't make you right... Apart from in your tiny mind of course...

[Paphitis]

No I am not. I am just stating the obvious.

The CM article was inaccurate nonsense.

The gambling article was not a media release.

Wrong on both counts...

But then just about everything you post is wrong.

And ignoring those that prove you wrong with links and facts doesn't make you right... Apart from in your tiny mind of course...

I don't think so.

You proved my point exactly!

[cyprusgrump]

No I am not. I am just stating the obvious.

The CM article was inaccurate nonsense.

The gambling article was not a media release.

Wrong on both counts...

But then just about everything you post is wrong.

And ignoring those that prove you wrong with links and facts doesn't make you right... Apart from in your tiny mind of course...

I don't think so.

You proved my point exactly!

Fair enough, I can see that you'd like to draw a line under your total humiliation and move on...

We'll just agree that you know little about diving, nothing about Nitrox and even less about how the MSM come up with their 'news'...