The headline is a quote. A sensationalist, false statement from an exploitative billionaire. The down votes are reflexive but logical considering demographics here. VOA ran with the headline for a reason. Even if the article debunks the headline. It was a poor choice considering the source.
But is it headline worthy? Yes my issue is with the headline. Why not simply make the headline “Zuckerberg testifies to Congress”? It’s factual, demonstrably true, and accurate. Is it responsible to publish a known lie as a headline simply for its salacious and attention grabbing nature. As well as pandering to confirmation bias?
The article may very well be fine. But the downvotes for yellow journalistic practices I think are not undeserved.
Okay, then Zuckerberg’s Congressional statement then. It’s not a significant change.
Nah, as I said. The article is fine. It’s literally the headline that’s the issue. Literally. Try a different strawman.
This isn’t just a VOA thing or anything. But a far too common point of contention with all modern media. It’s irresponsible and tabloid. For all the people who see the headline, but don’t read the article or didn’t already know it to be a misrepresentation/lie. Arguably most people. The headline isn’t just uninformative. But misinformative. And it’s all over. Got nothing to do with whether a publication leans to any one group or another. I down vote shitty headlines I see like this being posted by nominally left leaning groups or right.
And it’s sad, because there can still be good journalism going on under all the manipulative editorialization.
The headline is a quote. A sensationalist, false statement from an exploitative billionaire. The down votes are reflexive but logical considering demographics here. VOA ran with the headline for a reason. Even if the article debunks the headline. It was a poor choice considering the source.
deleted by creator
But is it headline worthy? Yes my issue is with the headline. Why not simply make the headline “Zuckerberg testifies to Congress”? It’s factual, demonstrably true, and accurate. Is it responsible to publish a known lie as a headline simply for its salacious and attention grabbing nature. As well as pandering to confirmation bias?
The article may very well be fine. But the downvotes for yellow journalistic practices I think are not undeserved.
deleted by creator
Okay, then Zuckerberg’s Congressional statement then. It’s not a significant change.
Nah, as I said. The article is fine. It’s literally the headline that’s the issue. Literally. Try a different strawman.
This isn’t just a VOA thing or anything. But a far too common point of contention with all modern media. It’s irresponsible and tabloid. For all the people who see the headline, but don’t read the article or didn’t already know it to be a misrepresentation/lie. Arguably most people. The headline isn’t just uninformative. But misinformative. And it’s all over. Got nothing to do with whether a publication leans to any one group or another. I down vote shitty headlines I see like this being posted by nominally left leaning groups or right.
And it’s sad, because there can still be good journalism going on under all the manipulative editorialization.