Note:

I swapped the original article at the request of a mod to from a source deemed more reliable, but to avoid confusion when reading the comment section prior to this edit, here is the link to the original article. I chose the Relief Web source listed by some who commented. Cheers!

  • ???@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Yes

    So yes that a bad title necessarily means the article is biased?

    • jet@hackertalks.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yes. Because the article exists as a tuple of both the title and the content, and the title dominates. The title poisons the article

      • ???@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think the truth dies only if you don’t read the full article in this case, as is expected of people before posting here…

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I can’t believe most people are reading the article before commenting in lemmy

          But even supposing they do, all the people who scroll past the article in the feed, are being poisoned by the lie in the title

          • ???@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t believe that either, which is why I sometimes ask them if they have.

            Sadly one cannot force anyone to read… one can only expect others to do it.