David, you mention Occam’s razor which is not a bad logical tool to adopt, so I ask you this. Is it more probable that the campaign of actual fake news that Facebook has identified is a one-off that has now been quashed, or is the likelihood that whoever is responsible for that campaign against City has also adopted other strategies as part of a wider strategy to denigrate Manchester City, and perhaps thereby denigrate the UAE?
if the latter, is the likelihood that the campaign is limited to fake news, or is it more likely that a range of strategies are adopted, including reporting that whilst not containing outright falsehoods is nonetheless not fair and balanced, a tendency to concentrate on pieces that show a City in a negative light, a tendency to act in ways that tarnish stories that show City in a positive light, and so on?
Again, if the latter, is the likelihood that whoever is responsible for this campaign will confine himself to a relatively unknown media outlet, or is it more likely that he would wish to engage more mainstream outlets?
And finally, if the latter, is it probable that the individual journalists who would be most likely to become inveigled in such a scheme would be the well established journalists, or is it more likely to be those who are younger, less financially secure, and more susceptible to being rewarded for producing output that seeks to further the same objectives as the discredited fake news stories?
