UKC

It seems that the book and the film may have been based on a trail of deceit........

  https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-real-salt-path-how-the-cou...

In reply to Trangia:

I've never read the books but I did read the article earlier, seems pretty damning.

I wonder what will happen - the article mentioned a different case of a publisher being sued for a book which claimed to be non-fiction but was exposed as not a true reflection of events.

In reply to Fellover:

republish as fiction ? 

In reply to Fellover:

In the USA  people sued I believe over Lance's book when the truth emerged. They lost AFAIK.

In reply to Trangia:

I've seen the film, I thought at the time that the start of it glossed over the reasons why they lost the house. It all becomes a bit clearer now as to why!

In reply to Trangia:

I read the first book some time ago and am now about halfway through the second. I also went to see the film, which I found rather annoying as I know the coast quite well and it flitted backwards and forwards all over the place.

I don't think I'll bother finishing the book now...

In reply to Trangia:

When someone expounds one lie, then how many others are there? I've read the Salt Path shortly after it was first published, and enjoyed the book. i think that some of those with money problems never always reveal the true extent of how they ended up in that predicament. It often trips you up in the end.

In reply to Pedro50:

It’s the cheapening of his pivotal scene in Dodgeball that I feel hard done by.

In reply to Trangia:

I'm glad I just borrowed the book from a friend now, rather than buying it and giving the Walkers money!  I did wonder when I read it how much of it was actually true and how much was embellished to make it more interesting (as many memoirs are I'm sure), but didn't think it would be to anything like that extent. How disappointing.

In reply to Mark Kemball:

A touch of the Poldarks!

In reply to Trangia:

Wow. I found the self-pity in the book irritating, but it does convey a sense of what it's like to walk on the coast path, and the experiences they had were well described so I did finish it.

They sound like a right pair. But at least she had the balls to write the book and drag herself out of her criminality. I hope the Observer's tale encourages them to repay their debts, and look forward no doubt to the ongoing coverage. Will I go watch the film - not sure.

Their suffering continues.

In reply to Trangia:

I do enjoy nature books of this kind (Roger Deakin, John Lewis-Stemple, Stephen Moss) but reading the blurb decided the tragedy (illness and financial loss) would make the story to depressing, and therefore passed. Years later I noticed she had written more stories and the husband was still alive.

I bet this will only sell more books.

In reply to Philip:

I don't think it will help sell more of the Winns' books, and Penguin are probably very unhappy about it right now. 

In reply to Trangia:

i read the book and enjoyed it. I was looking forward to reading the others but may not do so now.

I also met her when she did a tour with a band playing folk music. Her readings were very emotive.

All a bit sad really. I'm sure there are a lot of lives that would not stand up well to journalistic scrutiny though.

In reply to PaulW:

Mmmm!? There is a word for making a lot of money based on lies. Thank goodness we have some honest journalists left exposing such actions, when so many have been purchased to bury professional ethics and force feed us politically biased misinformation.

In reply to Trangia:

Haven’t read the book, but saw the film. As above, it didn’t explain why they lost their house, which struck me as odd. Lots of things in the film didn’t sit right with me, like where they pitched tent (on a beach, below HWM) and geographically rubbish. It seemed to peter out near Land’s End for no apparent reason,  and the fact that the guy was supposedly mortally ill but then went to uni, and seems to have miraculously recovered. 
I rather have that feeling I’ve been duped.

In reply to PaulW:

I enjoyed the first, bought the second, and gave up on it before long.

It felt like a re-hash of the first. Some different places, but you’d have been forgiven if you thought you’d accidentally started the first again.

In reply to Offwidth:

Politician

Are you suggesting she run for public office?

In reply to Trangia:

I genuinely don’t get the love for this book at all. I found it a load of self indulgent woe is me.
 

It showed no appreciation of the stunning coastline or the generosity and hospitality offered to them along the way.
 

The pair made bad decision after bad decision (probably not wise to spend what little money they had for the week on pasties and ice creams in premium priced tourist hotspots) and spent the entire book wallowing in self pity at their apparent bad luck and proudly talked of stealing nights at camp sites. 
 

The only thing that brought her out of her never ending misery was a chance encounter landing a flat in their lap in the final couple of pages.

In reply to Rog Wilko:

Hadn't even heard of these people until seeing this thread, and I don't know a lot about his illness, or whether it's genuine or not.  However, I do know that some terminal illnesses are difficult to predict a prognosis and development reliably.  The "x years to live" pronouncements that media likes to bandy around aren't an upper bound, but tend to be a median survival after these number of years.  So, clearly, around half the people with such a prognosis will beat that date.  A quick scan suggests a median survival of 7. 9 years, so it doesn't seem unlikely that this individual could still be alive after what I think is 11(?), especially as CBD appears to have a wide variability. Also, often with these things you can vary a lot from day to day (not sure how true that is of CBD), and people tend to see you on good days as you might not want/be able to leave  your house.

I just mention it  because it's pretty annoying for people to think you're faking it because you've not done the decent thing and died when you were supposed to, or for people to be surprised because you "look OK" when you've actually left the house on one of the 10% of days when you actually feel up to doing so. 

I guess we' ll find out in due course in thisinstance, but this may take several years and personally I'm inclined to give them the benefit until it's been demonstrated otherwise. 

In reply to Offwidth:

Not sure I often put honest and journalist in the same sentence. I do agree we should treasure the few journalists with integrity that we do have.

There are two sides to every story and it does seem that unethical and possibly criminal behaviour has been glossed over to present a more sympathetic figure.

I felt a little disappointed by the Observer, it just seemed a little like muck raking of an easy target. There are lots of public figures who lie and commit crimes that would in my opinion be a more suitable target for such investigations

In reply to Petrafied:

In general, I think those are good and important points. But in this case the journalist appears to have consulted with clinical experts in the specific disease who have themselves expressed doubt about the plausibility of the diagnosis. Unqualified lay people saying "people normally only live x years with the disease so he should be dead by now" isn't particularly meaningful. Experts in the particular disease saying that his progression (or lack thereof) is implausible carries much more weight for me. Especially in context with the rest of their behaviour.

In reply to Petrafied:

a lot of figures aren't even median.  Life expectancy its self is a mean.

In reply to Trangia:

To be honest, I never really believed that they accidentally managed to lose their home. It didn't make sense to me. So I kind of assumed that they had some bad debts. The illness stuff I'm not bothered about. I'm not sure any of this article is really surprising to me. I was more surprised with this idea that people would accidentally lose their home in the way that they described in the book (which I really enjoyed actually).

In reply to PaulW:

I think you can stop there. It used to be a great newspaper. Over the years its become less so. It was a Sunday long read for me, years ago. I think now, its just a lifestyle guide for the middle classes. I expect at some point, it will be killed off and finally rolled into the Guardian.

With that said, perhaps the stories that appear are those that appeal to the target audience. And, coincidently, are cheap to produce.

In reply to dread-i:

The Observer isn't part of the Guardian trust any more - it was sold to Tortoise Media, fairly controversially, a couple months ago.

In reply to Trangia:

Article on the BBC:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2z0707mlgo

In reply to Trangia:

I read the books and enjoyed them. I never felt the miraculous cure rang true though. The Observer did a real number on them. 4 pages. They must be pretty confident of their sources otherwise they're going to get sued senseless. 

In reply to FactorXXX:

From the article... "This is the true story of our journey."

The journey itself notably not being the part of their story that the Observer disputed! It's structured to sound like a denial of the accusations without really saying much about them.

In reply to Trangia:

I wonder how Big Issue are taking it.

She has a flair for writing. Now, it seems, a talent for fiction. Jeffrey Archer is still crankin' them out. Maybe she'll get away with it.

I enjoyed the book and have just enjoyed the film too. I feel a bit of a mug though.

In reply to Trangia:

Glad I never wasted my money on the book or the film.  Folk who falsley make out they have some terminal disease to get sympathy and sell books deserve everything that Karma can throw at them.....................

In reply to Luke90:

I read that and thought it had the ring of following legal advice…

In a general way the story reminds me of a couple playing out a masquerade life abroad in Tom Sharpe’s “Indecent Exposure”.   I’ve met a couple of people whose history - as presented - turned out to be a fabrication but they knew better than to try and get a book deal out of it…

In reply to wintertree:

From a thread on Bluesky, it appears that the disclaimer at the front of the book is carefully worded (I have not validated this myself).  

In reply to Luke90:

The wording on all sides is almost amusing in how carefully it seems to have been put together. The Observer article is best, at the end, where the writer basically says "look, I'm not SAYING OUTRIGHT that they are horrible shysters, I am just reporting what various people who by all accounts know quite a lot, have said"

"Our journey"....and very soon afterward tying the word "spiritual" to that same "journey", is clumsy but might do the job. 

It's the film studio that pleases me most, totally covering their arses. "This is the film of the book The Salt Path, we adapted the book, we are not presenting it as truth" and of course even the majority of actual true story adaptations have to be riddled with disclaimers anyway - so, that the film studio even felt a need to comment, suggests that they are very actively distancing themselves from Moth and Winn. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I'm sure the Observer's lawyers have indeed been over it very carefully to make sure they're not exposed by putting in print something they can't substantiate, but I didn't think it was particularly mealy-mouthed about it. Not sure which section you're referring to but when I went back and reread the last few paragraphs of the article, I thought the penultimate one wasn't pulling many punches as a summary...

"Raynor Winn’s publisher says her story is “unflinchingly honest”. It’s not. The story, no doubt, has elements of truth, but it also misrepresents who they were, how they started out on their journey and the financial circumstances that provided the backdrop."

It's certainly stating a conclusion rather than hiding behind "some people have told us, we couldn't possibly say". I'm not really sure where you got that from, but I'll admit I couldn't be bothered to re-read the whole thing. They perhaps lean that direction a little over the medical diagnosis, but in the absence of his actual medical records, I think it's appropriate to let the clinical experts do the talking rather than weighing the journalist's opinion too heavily.

In reply to Luke90:

Good points, I kind of lazily skim read the last bit and then wrote what has turned out to be a poorly constructed post. I didn't mean to imply that the The Observer were being mealy mouthed or hiding. Quite the opposite.
Re-reading, it's in fact only this: "There is nothing I have seen to contradict his diagnosis or Sally Walker’s account of it. And medical miracles do happen." that has any whiff of disclaimer. It's overall a very strong and convincing attack. 

Thanks for the correction

In reply to Trangia:

This all reminds me of Seasick Steve a little bit, with his bunkum back story of life as a hobo.  Ultimately I don't think anyone minded too much that he was a fraud, the music was still great.

Speaking of musicians, Wilko Johnson is a good example of how an honest diagnosis of terminal illness can turn out to be wrong.  In his case the clinical expert who thought "you should really be dead by now" was a fan who'd been in the audience at one of his gigs and got in touch to say "come and see me at my office, this might be treatable after all".

In reply to Trangia:

Loiks similar to the Tom Moore scandal thst hit the Moore family after he died. At least he did raise money for the NHS. 

i tried reading Salt path , but gave up as i was not convinced about the circumstances of the financial background.  It all read a bit far fetched , turns out I  may have been right. 

Looks as thought they were just caught out  by the success of the book. 

In reply to neilh:

Think the Moore scandal was about unscrupulous freeloading hangers on rather than being based on criminality and deception. I started reading the salt path but gave up very quickly as it didn’t ring true and I couldn’t get into it.

In reply to JimR:

Maybe a matter of opinion but I think that setting up a charity, installing yourself as the CEO, and paying yourself a disproportionately large salary from a cut of donations, is a bit more than being a freeloading hanger-on, even if not "criminal" as such. Maybe I am splitting hairs though!


edit - just Googled "Tom Moore charity scandal". OK a "foundation" rather than a charity but still....

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/family-repeatedly-benefitted-from-misman...


The old litmus test. Would you buy a used car from this lady?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3ylqlqex8o

In reply to Blue Straggler:

We’re probably not arguing really. IMHO she was an obnoxious woman without moral compass but Tom himself I suspect was just an old man trying to do something. And btw I wonder how many reputed charities are just vehicles for execs to get high salaries?

In reply to JimR:

I was merely drawing a parallell with deception.The cases are different but the overriding principle is the same.People- the readers of Salt Path have been taken in/decieved  by a story.The story would not have been the same without the background.

In reply to freeflyer:

Has she dragged herself/themselves out of criminality in any way, yet? 

In reply to neilh:

Really? I don't think it matters, I enjoyed the book, and I don't think how they got into that position was really important.

In reply to stubbed:

The book is sold as a non fiction publication of a true story of transformation. If it were a work of fiction I'd have no issue with it Archer for instance is an ex-con who still successfully sells fiction bestsellers.

In reply to PaulW:

It shouldnt be either / or. Whether you are a high profile public figure or a rags-to-riches story of hope and fortitude, if you dupe the public for financial gain you should be scritinised and exposed.

In reply to dread-i:

 

A controversial approach, to be sure.

In reply to stubbed:

Then they could have omitted that part from the book and no one would have had a problem with it.

As it is, they misrepresented their circumstances and profited substantially from the deception.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Or prefaced that it was a representation of events with some elements either changed or fabricated.

Or in other language, fraud. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

No, indeed, but at least by writing a popular book, she has avoided further stealing, etc, and one would hope that as a result of the Observer story and the resulting social media witch-hunt (that bitch stole from others and now she's rich) she will see fit to make some steps in that direction, possibly by repaying whatever debts are outstanding and making the usual empty apology.

I'm reminded of Jonathan Aitken.

In reply to planetmarshall:

You are correct but, if the book was simply an account of their walk without anything about how they allegedly lost their home and the bloke's illness I don't think it would have got very far with the publishers and the film company.

As you say they misrepresented their circumstances which upped the emotional ante and made their story more interesting.

I wonder if they will pay off all their debts now.

Dave 

In reply to JimR:

Indeed we are not arguing at all As for the Ingram-Moore's, my uninformed take on it is that it genuinely started as an honest thing that "went viral", and they seized an opportunity to "get rich quick" off it by setting up the foundation. If "sending it viral" had been pre-meditated, then I suppose "all credit to them", but because the whole thing had caught the public's attention via a likeable story and a "heroic" individual, the air of misleading just feels a bit more pronounced than in other cases of wrongdoing.

In reply to Trangia:

Do we believe everything we read in the media? I grant that it's more likely to be true in the Observer than if it was in the Sun or Daily Mail but why are we believing the Observers version more than the version in the books? 

And presumably the CBD diagnosis came from a medical Dr. If so and it's a misdiagnosis then that's on the Dr, not the patient. 

I read the books and enjoyed them albeit I took some of the accounts with a pinch of salt (see what I did there!) but until the legal action plays out I'm not sure why so many are immediately assuming the Observers story is the truth. 

I suspect the actual truth lies somewhat in the middle as it usually does. 

In reply to boriselbrus:

The author and her husband are not disclosing this information at this time. 

In reply to boriselbrus:

If the Observer made errors they could be sued for libel. As such I doubt very much they have anything significantly wrong in what they write.

However, have you considered a job at the BBC with your 'somewhere in the middle' line in an asymmetric situation?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

As is their right. However, it is probably the most egregiously awful part of the story, worse than the deception about how they became homeless (ignoring the property in France). Disclosing the medical information would clear it up, if their version is indeed true, or at least close to the truth.

In reply to Trangia: Hopefully, if true, the literary prizes and associated money the authors received will be rescinded.  

We underestimate the importance of the relationship between a writer and reader and the emotional significance of a fraud on a reader. 

To be honest, this whole boring genre of nature writing books based on “How important/unique my journey/ experience is and how I want to demonstrate how special I am and make money from you” deserves to be tossed on the rubbish heap. Instead it has boomed in recent years.  

Would that not apply to many books about climbing adventures? I quite enjoy some of them.

In reply to Trangia: A fair point, but for me (and I accept it is my own view) the experience that shines through for instance a good SMC guidebook (or any other good guidebook) is what matters. Why? It’s because the focus of a great guidebook is on the reader and helping the reader on his or her journey.  It helps the reader to be a participant in a wonderful activity such as climbing or ski mountaineering rather than an observer of someone else’s “amazing” experience. 

In reply to Offwidth:

Indeed, but looking at the article it's very much "we interviewed this person and this is what they said". 

Plus it wouldn't be the first time a newspaper has printed a massive story to get sales/clicks which have been worth more than any future libel payout. Also bear in mind that suing for libel is VERY expensive. Does the auther have the money or want to risk it. 

Look, I don't know what the truth is and actually no one on here does, but I'm just surprised that so many are willing to believe the press when they have such a poor history of telling lies to make sales 

In reply to boriselbrus:

Authors reply here… which as you say puts some of the Observers reporting into perspective.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c89eq12qvl5o

In reply to Wimlands:

Still quite fishy... A sort of denial and admission all in one over the ?fraud and debts repaid...

In reply to Wimlands:

I am totally neutral on this.

She doesn’t coma across well in this. There’s a lot of “appears to show”, “I believe” etc. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

”come across”. Not “coma across”.

Unchecked typo. Posting to clarify that I wasn’t trying to do some clever humour 

In reply to Northie:

The only thing that matters is whether it's a good read or not, whatever the genre. There is a bewilderingly large pile of lip smackingly packaged "Nature" books in Waterstones these days. But the vogue got Nan Shepherd republished. So that's a plus.

In reply to Trangia:

Not sure why I'm getting so many down votes for suggesting we shouldn't believe everything we read in the media, and that sometimes non fiction works are a bit embellished. 

Ho hum... 

In reply to boriselbrus:

Me neither…

I don’t think the author has done too much wrong with her account. 

She left out the fallout with her previous employer. But that happened in years previous to the start of the book and let’s face it who would put that in.

The fact that walking with a heavy pack, restricting your calorie intake, being out in nature away from computers and screen time is going to be good for you regardless of your health problems at the start of the walk is pretty obviously correct as well.

In reply to Wimlands:

I think describing nicking £64,000 as a "fallout" is a little disingenuous.

Sure, walking cures everything.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

She wasn’t charged. Innocent until proven guilty ? And as said it wasn’t in the book.

And she hasn’t said walkings cured her husband, just been good for him. Hardly a contentious view I’d have thought on a climbing/hiking website such as this.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

Must say the daily mash take on it made me laugh 

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/walking-doesnt-cure-...

“Is the South West Coast Path life affirming?’ 

The pyramids are breathtaking. The Grand Canyon fills you with awe. Poorly maintained Cornish footpaths looking onto gunmetal waves heavy with sewage affirm little. “

In reply to Wimlands:

Innocent until someone lends you £100K to settle and makes all concerned sign an NDA? 

In reply to Wimlands:

Nicking the money isn't mentioned in the book so let's not comment on it? Wasn't the reason for doing the walk losing their house? So perhaps the reason they lost their house (one of their houses) might be pertinent?

No, your contention "The fact that walking with a heavy pack, restricting your calorie intake, being out in nature away from computers and screen time is going to be good for you regardless of your health problems at the start of the walk is pretty obviously correct as well", is what I take issue with.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

I maybe overstated that bit a little😀I’m slightly biased as I’m fighting an underlying health problem and getting out the house to do exercise can be very challenging some times…but always worth the effort if I make it.

Walkings good for you. We can agree on that can’t we.

In reply to Wimlands:

There are chronic conditions where overdoing it on any form of exercise is bad.

In reply to wintertree:

Completely agree…but I’d suggest that by walking you can easily manage your levels of exertion.

She just described the impact on her husband. I don’t think she was being dishonest and selling SWCP snake oil.

In reply to Wimlands:

Might not be recommended for a broken leg.

I do you know she was describing the impact on her husband? Perhaps she made it up, perhaps she thought it might sell better than "healthy couple steal money and walk round Cornwall".

In reply to Wimlands:

If you are bimbling out from your house then possibly. If you are doing the SWCP and need to make the next village so you can refill water etc somewhat less so.

Before I got distracted by other things I did the first 100 miles as a walk (normal direction). Even there couple of days where you needed to make the distance which included some really annoying drops into valleys and back up in order to get water. Without support to deliver supplies it wouldnt be that easy to manage.

Which then gets into tiredness and immune system suppression which really isnt something you want if you have a serious condition.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

No pain, no gain.

Pain is just weakness leaving your body. As is that bone poking through your skin.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

"Healthy couple steal money and walk round Cornwall"

Hilarious. Best comment on the thread.

In reply to Trangia:

There is an excellent spoof on this story on Dead Ringers on Radio 4, aired last night at 6.30pm: Have a listen.

In reply to Trangia:

Latest Observer update:

https://observer.co.uk/culture/books/article/fact-and-fiction-raynor-winn-w...

Plus some later information from a couple who helped them:

https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/moth-told-me-he-was-dying-when...

In reply to Offwidth:

I think her "such a level of honesty" self-description needs to become an ironic catchphrase.

In reply to stone elworthy:

it’s this year’s “The Wonka Experience”

In reply to boriselbrus:

Because fabricating an investigative report into an eight year old travel memoir would be a bit of a weird thing to do? It's hardly going to single handedly revitalise the print media industry, is it?

In reply to boriselbrus:

I can think of a few examples of underhand tactics and others where newspapers have been taken for a ride (eg The Hitler Diaries), but I can't think of any examples offhand where they've flat out invented a story and presented it as fact. What kind of thing were you thinking of?

In reply to boriselbrus:

Yes

No

In reply to planetmarshall:

Clarifying hopefully for your benefit at least….you do mean you can’t think of examples where respectable press have flat out made something to present as fact ?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Can you?  Our press is pretty polarised, so there's a lot of spin and some selective disclosure, and a lot lazy shorthand and stereotyping, but straightforward making up stuff that's factually untrue?     

Although it depends a bit on how you define 'respectable' I suppose.  I'm assuming you're not including Freddie Mercury ate my hamster.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Fake news! That was Freddie Starr!

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Not really. Closest I can think of was The Sun's "One in Five Muslims...", and that's not really the "respectable" press. Most well known examples I can think of - The Hitler Diaries, Abu Ghraib torture photos - were hoaxes perpetrated on newspapers rather than by them.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

No, but I am no expert. What I see a lot of, including in “respectable” press, is the spin you refer to that can indeed “spin” the meaning of a story around totally, and devious use of disingenuous wording 

In reply to planetmarshall:

Thanks! 

In reply to abcdefg:

Sorry, you’re right of course.  The idea of Freddie Mercury eating a hamster is obviously ridiculous.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Richard Gere allegedly is quite partial to a bit of gerbil.

In reply to boriselbrus:

Fully aware of your disclaimers but after a week or two of this,  are you still wanting to defend Sally Walker who by appearance doesn’t want anyone else to defend her? 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

There are quite a lot of direct quotes from the Hemmings https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c80p2pzgpmgo If you're wrongly accused in that manner you'd surely be tempted to take legal action (if you'd sold a lot of books and could afford to).

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I’m happy to keep defending her.

The book didn’t include her time where years previously she was accused of embezzling money and had to pay it back…but I don’t blame her for not including that. Who would after all.

She’s provided evidence that her Husband had indeed been diagnosed with CBD. She thinks walking has helped.

In reply to Wimlands:

Why, it's been shown time and again her grasp of the truth is flimsy

Quite, because it would shatter one of the central pillars of the book. 'woman pinches money which sets off a chain of events which ends with her losing her home' is hardly gripping.

Has she? Not that I have seen. She seems to me to have been exposed as supremely expoitative and to have used a desease to manipulate public opinion.  

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

I hesitate to say “some people just want to appear different in some tragic edgelord fantasy way”, because e.g. the muddiness of the Lucy Letby case, but….

some people just want to appear different in some tragic edgelord fantasy way 

In reply to Trangia:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/picture/2025/aug/03/tom-gauld-on-the-doub...

In reply to deepsoup:

You just beat me to it

More revelations from the Observer about businesses she criticised in the book being untrue

https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-salt-path-portrayals-that-...

In reply to Alex Pryor:

I think this book should stand on its merits, such as they are. It clearly strikes a chord with the mememe / victim culture prevalent in social media. Truth in this context is about the journey of two damaged individuals trying to find themselves in a down and out context, and serendipitously making some money doing it. And it’s about desperate hacks finding a good story to raise their profile. May they all live long and prosper.

In reply to freeflyer:

FTFY