#still crediting people who aren't on the site or that blog anymore

[songfell-ut]

Songfell anniversary post, pt 2

Choo choooo here comes the second train of Songfell images I collected via posts and reblogs from this specific Tumblr, which means there's lots of video art not included. Kudos to @nuvex for the cutest cake-eater yes she is <3

(Part 1, Part 3)

Nuvie's other Frisk is frigging fantastic. I took embarrassingly long to notice the Delta Rune designs on the cover. I was focusing on her...lots of things, but I'm allowed to say "boobs" on my own blog. Anyway, picking back up chronologically:

This is Frisk's hobby: cleaning up blood and sending people to jail at two in the frickin' morning. I believe these were the first pieces we got from @marihem :3

@venelona takes us through storytime, where it is established that Kris was a little boy who is vanished the end

*humming "Memory" from Cats*

Studying things that need to be studied

Everyone went on about Dr. Serif being Snape, but I actually gave Catler1 a reference of Soren from Fire Emblem.

I think I've reposted this one like 15 times. Just look at all the details @sharkowskii put on the table ;_;

Someone doesn't like listening to humans apologizing for Frisk about how much they suck and making Frisk not be there where he can see her >:( @smolspoopy captured it quite effectively.

Speaking of capture: here Vene shows us one of Sans' biggest regrets in trying to ditch Frisk

...Speaking of regrets in trying to ditch Frisk

This has become one of my favorite reaction images. Thank u Mari

Not from the same point in the story, but @feelisia got the same feeling here

Now we are less >:o and a lot more DDDDD:

Yadda yadda assassin, and it turns out she cute :|

The wild, sexy shenanigans they get up to when it's just the two of them :3 Studying all night long~ (Thanks, @moonrosebunnie!)

Some of my favorite shenanigans: tiny lady getting in a giant monster's face because he's being a dick 🤬 Frisk is not into that kind of dick, thank you, sir (and Sharky)

And last in this batch, from @mambourin, is Frisk being courted by a dude with......no I refuse to make a "wingman" pun, partly because I'm pissed I didn't think of it earlier. Gotta remember that one.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

Please share your reasoning when you get a chance on why you don't believe Theresa Longo Fans. Granted, they have been wrong before.

So the TL;DR of it is:

They're anonymous journalists and that's suspicious.

They haven't updated their brag sheet in 6 years, which means they haven't had a good source in 6 years.

They plagiarize almost everything.

They use vague language and broad generalities in their scoops that lets them take credit no matter what happens.

Keep reading for the longer explanations.

1. I'm always immediately suspicious of anyone in journalism that doesn't use their name. When a journalist is anonymous, especially when they have no need to be like in TLF's case, it's not easy to hold them accountable to lies and mistakes. The two guys behind TLF like to brag about their journalism credentials, and that's huge because there's no way to follow up to make sure they are who they say they are. They rely on "just trust me" authority, and when has that ever worked out? Especially with blind gossip sites (in addition to TLF, this includes CDAN, Blind Gossip, DeuxMoi, and Exposing SMG), you can't verify the accuracy of what they post - especially when you consider that CDAN, Enty, and DeuxMoi all admitted they make stuff up.

(And also ExposingSMG rarely has new information when it comes to the BRF. (They might have sources for other celebs, but I don't pay attention close enough.) Specifically, they just repeat what was being discussed on the blogs and reddit, calling them "my source" so they don't have to cite. BTW, ExposingSMG has since rebranded as Scandalous.Media. They posted about the Sussexes recently and some of their quoted sources or "revelations" are things that have been around for awhile. This one in particular I think is a combination of info from CDAN and SMM.)

I saw somewhere once that the TLF guys don't share their names so they can protect the privacy and confidentiality of their sources. But I call BS. If journalists needed anonymity to protect their sources, then why aren't more journalists reporting anonymously? These two guys are the only people I know that calls themselves journalists who do this, and to me that is suspicious. (Exceptions only for reporters in war zones.)

2. Look at the scoops they take credit for in their pinned tweet: Sussex baby #1, Khloe Kardashian's pregnancy, Kylie Jenner's baby, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's divorce, Megxit, Wendy Williams's show demise, and the Pulse/Orlando nightclub shooting. What these all have in common is that they are events from 2016 - 2019. Meaning they had really good sources, contacts, and access 6-8 years ago. And that list not having anything more recent suggests they don't have the kind of sources, contacts, and access anymore. If they did, and if they were still getting the same sort of accurate scoops that they were 7 years ago, this list would be updated to inclde those more recent events. Why haven't they?

Now, that's not to say they never had good sources. They did have good sources, and whoever it was, their information was solid enough that it upset Meghan enough to get Bouzy to take TLF down. That doesn't really mean anything because a broken clock is still correct twice a day.

3. The tweets themselves are problematic. In fact, most of them are plagiarized.

If there's a direct quote in the tweet, it's plagiarized from some other source/news media and TLF never cites the source. For example, this TLF tweet from January 8th:

It implies that they've interviewed Dominic himself. But they never spoke to Dominic. The quotes come, verbatim, from this January 6th article published by The Mirror.

And for tweets without a direct quote in it, they usually try to pass it off as their own scoop but nine times out of ten, it isn't. For example, this tweet:

It looks like a good scoop. At face value, it is: they know someone who saw Shia at church and connected one plus one.

But #1, when you search "Actor Shia LaBeouf appears to have converted to Catholicism after being seen at a New Year's Eve Mass presided over by Capuchin Franciscan friars," this article from the Associated Press on December 31st comes up:

Almost everything they publish is like this. Go ahead - choose any tweet, copy the text into a search engine, and see what happens.

And #2, look at their verbiage. Specifically, the phrase appears to have in the Shia tweet above. This is how they get away with passing off their stories as scoops, with vague verbage that could go either way. That way, when an article is later published about it, they can grab the "original" tweet and claim credit with "as we told our followers back in..." or "no surprise to our followers..." tweets.

*******************************

Now, specific to royal-watching: they completely and totally missed the ball on big stuff (like Platinum Jubilee and Coronation appearances), but they got it on the smaller stuff (Spare and Frogmore). But the kicker is that the smaller stuff is things that were either written about by royal reporters or was plausible gossip floating around the royal fandom.

The things they were wildly wrong on - for instance, the children being on the balcony at the Platinum Jubilee and the royals hosting a birthday party for Archie after the coronation - were things that came directly from Meghan's PR. So either they didn't realize it was Meghan's PR or they decided to hedge their bets and post it anyway on the off-chance it happened, which I think is in poor taste but it makes for very fun entertainment.