I see the Direly Banal has tripped up and settled up a damages case. Unable to successfully debunk a "psychic". Wow. For their next trick, they will entirely fail to shoot fish in a barrel and then they'll cock up the planned Christmas Party in a nearby brewery. They really should stick to making up stuff about people who cannot strike back. It's all they're good at.
It was the highly specific facts of a specific scam which the Mail failed to prove were true; hence the libel settlement. Doesn't alter the ability of the Mail, or anyone else, to assert in general terms that psychics are fakes.
Indeed. To have to make a settlement when you are attempting to de-bunk an obvious charlatan is, for me, further and clear evidence of the Daily Flail's inability to serve any useful purpose.
It's not actually true to say they failled to debunk a "psychic"... They got caught out by saying she was using an ear-piece when she clearly wasn't, and therefore were publishing something that was untrue. It's an interseting case, given that "pschics" are now legally obliged ( in the UK at least ) to say that there shows are purely for entertainment purposes only. To be honest if the Mail couldn't spot cold reading when they saw it they weren't trying very hard !
I think it is precisely true to say they failed to de-bunk. Not because the "psychic" is genuine, but because their method was asinine flawed.
Their method was flawed as it was, obviously, ( in common with a lot of other newspaper journalists ) to blatantly lie. What I was trying to say is that they got caught lying and that's why they have had to pay damages. Quite why they thought that they had to debunk a "psychic" is not clear... It's just one of those subjects that tabloids seem to go back to every so often when they haven't got any real news to report.
