I apologise if this has been posted already, however I’m interested in your opinions on the way this is written.
To me it’s not at all negative and even has some positivity, although not overtly.
As that’s probably a fair bit to do with my own bias, do you agree with my assessment or have you any other opinions or perspective?
I’ll add that I’m not familiar with the journo. Any insight as to her position or track record would be very useful if you have it.
Thanks for reading, I look forward to your input.
Thanks for the reply and interesting reading it is too.
I hope Havertz proves everyone wrong as well but like you say, the standards don’t seem particularly even right now.
If it’s a puff piece, and I’m not saying it isn’t, what’s the motivation? What angle are they going for?
The BBC is impartial to a certain extent. This article is impartial but positive because the moment they are reporting about is a highlight of Havertz’s.