-
Right, but it's provable JC did actually like a post about saving a mural loaded with antisemitic tropes.
You obviously can't prove whether he looked at a picture of the mural before liking the post, or whether he has ever seen any antisemitic cartons before. But you can prove if it happened or not.
Whereas to have a basis to substantiate some of those allegations you need more than a screenshot of a spreadsheet.
hugo7-
Who's talking about substantiating anything? You don't need to. All you have to do is keep repeating the allegation, substantiated or not, and attribute it. Which, as we have seen, can totally happen in an all-channels, high-pitched screeching way designed to cause maximum damage. Should that be what the commentariat/media wishes.
I suppose it comes down to who they particularly want to harm and who they think deserves a 'nothing to see here' and it's not difficult to see which was which here, is it?
ketsbaia
Objectively, you're right. But that kind of objectivity hasn't stopped our media/commentariat taking much less scandalous stuff - say, a politician liking a post about saving a mural several years ago - and running with it at high volume for months on end, has it? And I'd invite you to wonder why that might be and what kind of agenda that would suggest said commentariat/media had at the time.