Judge for yourself
here's his defense:
He laughs off the impact of Twitter and says it's "ludicrous" that people were influenced.
You can judge if the viewer would glean from this "but of course social media campaigns, including Vote Leave ones, *do* influence people"
Again you can judge if this is useful in the current context
One would assume that's a fair question, @OwenJones84 clearly ridicules that particular assertion
Which isn't the issue, the issue is the source (and timing) of Bank's £8M donation
How is the viewer left here?
Has he helped or hindered the debate around the Bank's donation? Has he highlighted or undermined the WW issue of fake news in political campaigns? Has he acted against or positively for the leave lies in the ref?
End