Media Twitter. A service announcement. Everyone else please look away. Media ‘spats’ are boring & pointless. But for the record..
A week ago, Buzzfeed published a story about which quoted anonymous sources. The reporter did not talk to me. Instead he sent a list of questions a few hours before publication.
I was, well, a bit wary. This exchange is from the early hours of Aug 1. The tweet that prompted it has since been deleted. 
And the angle..
The piece contained multiple claims presented as facts, that I contend are provably incorrect or inaccurate. Instead of getting into a Twitter fight, I followed normal due process and wrote & asked Buzzfeed to correct.
Buzzfeed has now responded to say it stands by the article and doesn’t wish to enter into correspondence on any of the points. Nobody has returned my calls.
So be it. It’s not like there’s much actual news around...oh. Buzzfeed missed & dismissed the CA story, so you know...But it was way out ahead with Vote Leave overspending. It broke the story first back in Aug 16. Not sure why no interest now
buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/v…
buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/v…
But I’m sure that both Buzzfeed reporters who hounded me over a correction the Observer published to my article on AIQ have had a good read of interim ICO findings. Which confirmed our reporting. Here’s a link boys
ico.org.uk/media/action-w…
ico.org.uk/media/action-w…
FYI no British news outlet has reported on Canadian parliament’s ongoing attempts to get at truth about AIQ. This, remember, is the story you originally broke.
Finally, I took what action I believed was necessary to protect sources. One of them took his own separate parallel legal action for same purpose and same reasons. All media partners, I believe, would now agree that they are glad they did not break agreement & publish first.
