![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alt_crouch_jrI was tied up this morning or I'd have seen this sooner. Have either of you seen the newest edition of Londinarium? Specifically the piece on the Campbell wedding.
Lucius: can you verify that the information about Parkinson was authorised by someone? If not, I'll be happy to bring Bobolis in for a conversation about his sources and his presentation of the facts. More if you think it necessary.
Lucius: can you verify that the information about Parkinson was authorised by someone? If not, I'll be happy to bring Bobolis in for a conversation about his sources and his presentation of the facts. More if you think it necessary.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-12 11:19 pm (UTC)Have you seen Yaxley? Suspect he will not be best pleased, as Narcissa reports, and not only because his part in the battle was downplayed in favour of Tony's tragedy.
I am most perturbed by the intimation that I declined to be interviewed, when his request was vague and misleading at best. I've got Hooper tracking him down now and I fully intend to impress upon them both the importance of clarity when requesting an audience or a comment.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-01-12 11:25 pm (UTC)Ah.
Well, then. If none of it was unauthorised or misrepresented, I suppose you are right and he's stayed just his side of the journalistic line once again. He does skirt it dangerously. And infuriatingly.
We'll forgo the entertainment, then.
Shame.
Private Message to Barty Crouch, Jr.
Date: 2011-01-12 11:34 pm (UTC)Or we could leave off the additional threat your presence would doubtless communicate and wait for him to over-step himself. Certain he will, one of these days.
Re: Private Message to Barty Crouch, Jr.
Date: 2011-01-12 11:53 pm (UTC)As I've told Narcissa, it's gracious of you to spare him the additional threat. This time.