If ipothetically you knew someone who could dispute most of the facts of a popular blog entry what would it be the right thing to do?
Like, if it was reporting, I would have no qualms in proposing a rebuttal, but since it’s just blogging, and personal, I think it still falls behind ‘author embellishment’ or some shit like that.
It is bullshit because the blog is almost literally built on the purpose of sharing ‘true stories’ but I think it’s one of those classic scenarios of arguments you can’t win on the internet, and therefore my friend should abstain from getting involved.
But this is mostly why I have lots of respect for news reporters and fiction writers, because they kinda made the choice. Anybody else that just swings in between is just a hack.