Originally Posted by mgtarheels

It's circular reasoning, the most common fallacy in debate.

Him giving his stance, granted without citation, was his "strike".

You took his statement, and instead of trying to refute an extremely clear statement, and asked him to prove you wrong that his claim is from an entity other than from the grasp of Murdoch.

Burden of proof was to be on you, and instead you twisted it into leading assumptions which then lead to a leading request all while cloaking your point.

Your intentions were clear, and it was circular reasoning.