Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith
|
Not an opinion for or against the halo - but those two articles show how the context of a quote is so important to judge what is being said by the person speaking.
In both articles, the words of Charlie Whiting are given as 'it would have been [a bit of] a miracle'. The context though is clearer in the planetf1 article.
Guardian -
'The race director, Charlie Whiting, said it would have been a miracle if Leclerc had not been struck were it not for the halo.'
PlanetF1 -
'the tyre marks could have actually been on Charles’ head. It would have been a bit of a miracle if they weren’t had the Halo not been there. There’s a huge extent of the tyre marks, as you’ve all seen I’m sure. So it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to think that that probably would have made contact with his head. But it is slightly speculative'
A reminder that context is so important when attributing comments, and that we should always consider the intent of the writer when presenting their 'evidence'?