The story was written in such a way as if it were true. It didn't say "if Paul was dead, this might have happened etc" but was written as fact. I wonder whether the journalists original intention was to expose Paul as really being dead but was then "instructed" that he couldn't do that, that it had to be seen as a hoax. Nevertheless, he decided not the change the words or sense of the original article (except perhaps "Campbell" and so on)...
...and please pay attention to page 20...very revealing!
Probably journalists knew always the truth!
WOW! SK that's really fantastic and it makes perfect sense....it takes 3 guys to replace one James Paul McCartney. And John was the song writer which also makes logical sense because they had written soooo many songs together, who would know better about Paul's style???