by Leonmc0708 » Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:27 am
This thread, and hte comments inside are a classic example of the problems with people being led by the media.
Here is a tip - if you are looking at an article, best thing to do is ignore the title and the wording and look for the actual quotes.
Then see who the quotes are from and then make your own mind up.
NB Quotes from any of the following "our source" - "a source close to the club" or "our mole" should be disregarded immidiately. If a source cant be named, then its for a reason, and the reason is they dont exist or its a quote from an internet forum like this one.
Back to the article in question; there are two quotes:
""There is absolutely no truth whatsoever in the rumour that Mr Hicks is even considering investing in Roma football club," - this is from Roy Winnick who is Hicks' PA and press man.
And the other from the a shareholding company on Roma's official website saying the company had "been informed by a third party of the possible interest of an American businessman wanting to invest in AS Roma's capital".
The statement added: "As of yet, Italpetroli has not received, directly or indirectly, any interest nor offer from such investor, with the object of acquiring the majority package of AS Roma."
What I take from this article is that a journalist has seen the report on the Roma website, thought immidiately of Hicks, asked them and was told it was boll.ocks but published the story anyway as he fancied an early dart.
JUSTICE FOR THE 96
