C'mon man. I have firsthand knowledge of an editor asking a contributor to remove mentioning Amazon in a story because it cast the company in a negative light.
If a random guy online uses an account created a couple of days ago to say he has knowledge of something without providing any proof or substance then everyone should just blindly trust him and take his word for it.
Well... You may have firsthand knowledge or claim to have firsthand knowledge, but the rest of us don't.
When you saw that happening, did you just let it slide? Where did it happen? Was the story originally about Amazon or was it just an off-topic side remark that didn't really fit in?
Not everyone is willing to martyr themselves for a cause. Just because no such information has leaked yet does not mean it has not happened or that there will not be such leaks in the future.
Why should I stop sawing this branch I am sitting on, I havent fallen yet ?
> Why should I stop sawing this branch I am sitting on, I havent fallen yet ?
Your argument is that we can't prove the absence of a conspiracy.
Hence, a better analogy would be
"why should i stop sawing this branch? just because gravity has never left me suspended in thin air doesn't mean it can't or won't happen in the future"
Right?