BBC Fake news about conspiracy
It drives me mad when 'journalists' write this way. So the story is about the frankly ridiculous consipracy theory that somehow Boris Johnson is only doing Brexit at the bidding of Hedge Fund managers who want No Deal. This is a Labour party sponsored conspriacy, manufactured entiely by their PR department.
Rather than starting with the obvious point - that there is not one shred of evidence, anywhere, for this baloney. The article instead spends ages saying why people might belive this were true, before, several tedious paragrapsh in, getting to the point that there is no evidence and even the tenets of the consiparcy have no merit.
Even then, it ends thus:
"The widespread acceptance of this current conspiracy theory demonstrates that this rings true for many. But, as yet, there has not been enough evidence produced that a few shadowy financiers are pulling the strings of a no-deal Brexit puppet."
So basically, it is OK to write about this becuase it sounds plausible even though there is no evidence for it. I would be hard pushed to say the article is even clear because the vast majority of it is spent re-gurgitating the Labour spin lines and only a tiny amount de-bunking at the end.
You may as well write articles about a moon made of cheese or Lizards controlling the UN. Someone remind me why I pay a licence fee to have people write badly hidden Labour Party propoganda?