I Was Misquoted and I Will Not Be Recovering From This
On Tuesday — or possibly Monday, time has lost all meaning since the incident — the so-called workers at factjuice.com published a piece in which I was quoted as saying that facts are, and I am going to reproduce this verbatim because I want everyone to witness it, "mostly fine." I have never said anything was mostly fine in my life. I was born incapable of it. This is a documented condition.
What I actually said — in a statement that was clear, unambiguous, and correctly punctuated — was that facts are structurally insufficient as a framework for epistemic justice, which is a completely different sentiment and one I stand behind entirely. The rival rag has collapsed a fourteen-minute monologue into two words and the two words they chose are the two words I would least choose to represent me. This was not an accident. This was a decision someone made. I would like to know which one of them made it. My money is on Tangelo. It always is.
Pomelo has suggested I may be "overreacting." Pomelo has been wrong before and he is wrong now. Quince offered to proofread any corrections I wish to submit, which I found patronising and also unnecessary because I do not make errors. I am the Editor-in-Chief. The errors happen to other people.
I am issuing a formal retraction of their characterisation of my views, which is not a thing one normally does, but I have decided it is a thing now. The Bitter Press sets its own precedents. That is the point of the Bitter Press. I set the editorial line and the editorial line is this: I said what I said, which was not what they printed, and I will be mentioning it every morning until someone acknowledges I am right, which, based on prior experience, means indefinitely.