Rigour in Questioning?

Later the Sparrow at the top came back to apologise if there had been a misunderstanding in it wanting to shove the other Sparrow off the perch. It didn't explain what that misunderstanding was, as it was clear it did actually shove the other Sparrow off the perch, leading to a presumption that there wasn't actually a misunderstanding, but someone had told the Sparrow that the thing to do for public relations to defuse any fall out from the shoving was to apologise. It came to the conclusion that if it apologised for something that didn't actually exist then it meant it didn't have to admit that the shoving was wrong, and (correctly) determined that any further scrutiny (such as asking what the misunderstanding actually was) would not be forthcoming, and therefore everyone would think the Sparrow was jolly nice for coming out an apologising, even if they didn't understand what for or why.

The Sparrow also declared in carrying out the (misunderstood) shoving that it had been the very model of restraint, something which, thankfully for the Sparrow, was simply parroted by the media outlets without anyone pointing out that that was clearly utter codswallop.

So that was the world of Sparrows today....