Yesterday, Australian Cricketer Mitchell Johnson had accused that Times of India has published an interview with him which never took place. He said that he never sat for a question and answer session with the ‘interviewer’.
But Times of India had refuted the cricketer, saying the interview did take place, but it was not a formal one. They said that the journalist spoke to Johnson during the Perth test. TOI also said that the “interview” was carried out during several “informal sessions” and that it wasn’t a formal sit-down interview. The publication went on to accuse Johnson of having a faint memory. As a proof of the ‘interview’, TOI had a posted a photograph where both the reporter and cricketer was seen, but it seemed like a selfie taken by the reporter on a phone, not a photo clicked by a photojournalist. TOI had also argued that since Johnson says he agrees with some points made in the ‘interview’, this proves the conversation took place.
After the response by TOI, Mitchell Johnson has come up with an even stronger rebuttal against the claims made by the publication.
In response to your @toisports @TOISportsNews statement see the following: pic.twitter.com/9oQsTEp5aH
— Mitchell Johnson (@MitchJohnson398) December 24, 2018
In Tweet posted today, he made five points responding to TOI. These are the arguments he has made:
- A selfie is not proof an interview took place. I have taken thousands of selfies with fans over the years.
- There are plenty of articles I have read that I agree with parts of them however this does not mean I had anything to do with them.
- The format of the so called interview is Q & A and by your very own admission this did not take place.
- When you say this interview was based on parts of a conversation that was spread out over the test match. Which parts? Does that mean the rest is just made up to suit you?
- For the record now you have refreshed my “faint memory” I do recall this man lurking around during the test match trying to listen in on conversations I was having with other journalists. So I can only assume his so called Q & A was loosely based on parts of conversation he partially overheard me have with other people.
The cricketer has categorically asserted that he never spoke with the reporter of Times of India, and claims that the reporter must have overheard the conversation the cricket was having with other journalists, as the reporter was ‘lurking around’. He also says that thousands of fans take selfies with him, and such a photo can’t be proof that a conversation took place.
