Peter Tompa, a lawyer representing American coin dealers and their lobbying agenda, has attempted to deflect criticism that much of what he writes on his blog is likely to be financially motivated by challenging Paul Barford, an archaeologist, to reveal if he has a similar motivation ...
[...] in the interests of transparency please explain to your readers if you have ever received any payments from UNESCO or some other cultural heritage organization for any work.
(Paul replied: "I have indeed at various times been paid by UNESCO and other heritage organizations for quite a lot of hard work. It's ... what I do.")
Please confirm you have not received any payments in any fashion for working on your blog. ... Also, if you receive any payments for the work on your blog, please indicate from whom.
(Paul replied: "I am not getting any payment for this blog, I am not a paid lobbyist.")
Peter, many thanks for your wicked McCarthy impersonation. All rubbish of course since there is a massive difference between a blog raising issues directly related to paid lobbying by the blogger's clients and a blog raising issues only tangentially related to the blogger's profession. I think we know which one is likely to be financially motivated (regardless of whether the blogger is literally paid for the blog itself). But thanks for the chuckle.
Image: An American lawyer notorious for intense questioning.
No comments:
Post a Comment