Should Posters be Responsible for the Truthfulness of their Subject Lines, Even if they are Cut and Pasted from a "News" Headline?

[Mac-7]

You may as well just quit reading headlines. That is why they exist--to get your attention. The very nature of journalism is to influence the public to believe the way the publisher believes. It has always been that way. Research Hearst/Pulitzer, the Yellow Kid and muckrakers. How the Yellow Kid Fueled the Pulitzer/Hearst Rivalry
For every objective journalist in the world there are thousands more that just spread falsehoods for political agendas. I think USMB does alright as long as the title has a source, it is up to the consumer to read the article for themselves to determine its validity.

Yes of course we are responsible for posting falsehoods

 

[Mashmont]

This is something that has always happened, but lately it has been taken to another level. "Jouralists" are writing headlines like (and this is only a fictional example) "Candidate Joe Smith promises to help further genocide of Jews if elected." Reading the story, it turns out that Joe Smith said "if elected, I will advocate for a cease fire in Gaza."

Now, that journalist may sincerely believe that a cease-fire in Gaza would further the genocide of Jews, but that doesn't mean that is what Joe Smith said. He said one thing, and the journalist spun it to falsely have him saying something else. Very misleading.

Nothing we can do to stop those kind of clickbait headlines, but our mods and admins can certainly do something about such headlines being regurgetated into Forum subject lines, the story linked, and the OP demanding that the claim be defended as if it were really what the candidate said.

That was a fictitious example, but I have seen many examples just as blatant in threads about Trump or Biden. I recommend that when such threads are reported, and found to be misleading, they go immediately to one of the bottom drawer sections, like CT, or Flame Zone. It is a real disservice to those who rely on headlines for their information to lend them credibility.

Yes, we've seen that very recently with a leftwinger repeating the lying headline that Trump says he wants a recession when the story revealed he said no such thing. I called the leftwinger on it, and he and others doubled down.

 

[Foolardi]

MArk Twain said somewhere that wanting all error acknowledged INCREASES error. Tell kids what to not read, what to not think who to not listen to and you end up with gullible , stratened kids who will be the victim of every sucker in their adult life

The Damned Human Race
" Of all the animals,man is the only one
that is cruel.
Man is the only Religious animal.
Man is the only animal that deals in that
atrocity of atrocities,War.
He is the only animal that loves his neighbor
as himself and cuts his throat if his theology
isn't straight. "
" God was left out of the Constitution but was
furnished a front seat on the coins of the country. "
" The human race is a race of cowards. "
-- Samuel Langhorne Clemens { 1835-1910 }

 

[Delldude]

This is something that has always happened, but lately it has been taken to another level. "Jouralists" are writing headlines like (and this is only a fictional example) "Candidate Joe Smith promises to help further genocide of Jews if elected." Reading the story, it turns out that Joe Smith said "if elected, I will advocate for a cease fire in Gaza."

Now, that journalist may sincerely believe that a cease-fire in Gaza would further the genocide of Jews, but that doesn't mean that is what Joe Smith said. He said one thing, and the journalist spun it to falsely have him saying something else. Very misleading.

Nothing we can do to stop those kind of clickbait headlines, but our mods and admins can certainly do something about such headlines being regurgetated into Forum subject lines, the story linked, and the OP demanding that the claim be defended as if it were really what the candidate said.

That was a fictitious example, but I have seen many examples just as blatant in threads about Trump or Biden. I recommend that when such threads are reported, and found to be misleading, they go immediately to one of the bottom drawer sections, like CT, or Flame Zone. It is a real disservice to those who rely on headlines for their information to lend them credibility.

Good point. Tucker Carlson is a good example. It was claimed he supported Russia, and via selective editing, it sure looked like he did until you read the entire article.

Classic left move.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Too Little too late ... Pally.Journalism died a death of a
thousand cuts since Obama was elected in 2009.
Obama managed to twist the AP around his Marxist fingers.
Lied about Louis Lerner { IRS } and his IRS to Host Bill O'Reilly
on a Superbowl Sunday when asked about how the IRS Investigation
is going.Obama casually { his nominal apporoach } said ...
" Not a smidgen of Corruption ".Bill O'Reiily waited for a couple days
and responded to that quote by pleading ... The IRS Investigation
was still Ongoing How could Obama say with assurance what he
said to me on my Superbowl Interview.
Obama could for the same reason he used a word { Teabagger }
in his attempts to mock the New Political Movement { Tea Party }.
The { T-word } was officlally banned for use by the AP and
most all U.S. News sites.


It has gotten extreme since Trump beat the pants off
Hillary.Now it legion.Like trying to equate the common cold
with Legionnaires' Disease.
Getting more snarky Unamerican by the hour,the day the week.
" Journalism justifies its own existence by the great
Darwinian principle of the survival of the vulgarist. "
-- Oscar Wilde

Journalism truly died under Obama.

In college in the eighties, I took a class in journalistic ethics. Obama-era journalists seem to have missed that completely.

 

[noonereal]

This is something that has always happened, but lately it has been taken to another level. "Jouralists" are writing headlines like (and this is only a fictional example) "Candidate Joe Smith promises to help further genocide of Jews if elected." Reading the story, it turns out that Joe Smith said "if elected, I will advocate for a cease fire in Gaza."

Now, that journalist may sincerely believe that a cease-fire in Gaza would further the genocide of Jews, but that doesn't mean that is what Joe Smith said. He said one thing, and the journalist spun it to falsely have him saying something else. Very misleading.

Nothing we can do to stop those kind of clickbait headlines, but our mods and admins can certainly do something about such headlines being regurgetated into Forum subject lines, the story linked, and the OP demanding that the claim be defended as if it were really what the candidate said.

That was a fictitious example, but I have seen many examples just as blatant in threads about Trump or Biden. I recommend that when such threads are reported, and found to be misleading, they go immediately to one of the bottom drawer sections, like CT, or Flame Zone. It is a real disservice to those who rely on headlines for their information to lend them credibility.

Are you serious?

 

[Seymour Flops]

If we’re reading past the headline it wouldn't be an issue.

A year ago, I would have agreed with that. Such threads were not nearly as frequently posted as they are now.

I’ve tried to be neutral in making this complaint, but i have to point out that most of these clickbait headline threads are either Trump, or some other prominent Republicans “says _______________,” when they said nothing like that.

As a Trump supporter, it wastes my time, to click on so many thinking, ‘Shit, did he really say that?’ Only to find out that of course, he did not.

The problem is that Republicans are just as likely as Democrats to say something stupid in an off-guard moment, or even to say something stupid that they really mean. When that is done by someone i support, I want to read about it to possibly rethink my support.

Ok, I don’t usually complain, because why take it so seriously. I’ve said my piece, so I’ll drop it.

Thanks for your feedback.

 

[Concerned American]

Journalism truly died under Obama.

In college in the eighties, I took a class in journalistic ethics. Obama-era journalists seem to have missed that completely.

I really noticed that the press was getting increasingly manipulated around 2000

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The job of a fireman in Fahrenheit 451 was to start fires of books deemed inimical to the ruling class.

In 2024, the job of a journalist is to prevent the proles from being exposed to the truth.

 

[beautress]

This is something that has always happened, but lately it has been taken to another level. "Jouralists" are writing headlines like (and this is only a fictional example) "Candidate Joe Smith promises to help further genocide of Jews if elected." Reading the story, it turns out that Joe Smith said "if elected, I will advocate for a cease fire in Gaza."

Now, that journalist may sincerely believe that a cease-fire in Gaza would further the genocide of Jews, but that doesn't mean that is what Joe Smith said. He said one thing, and the journalist spun it to falsely have him saying something else. Very misleading.

Nothing we can do to stop those kind of clickbait headlines, but our mods and admins can certainly do something about such headlines being regurgetated into Forum subject lines, the story linked, and the OP demanding that the claim be defended as if it were really what the candidate said.

That was a fictitious example, but I have seen many examples just as blatant in threads about Trump or Biden. I recommend that when such threads are reported, and found to be misleading, they go immediately to one of the bottom drawer sections, like CT, or Flame Zone. It is a real disservice to those who rely on headlines for their information to lend them credibility.

Freedom of speech is dear to many unless it is filled with examples of taboo speech or prevarications ad nauseum.

 

[Concerned American]

The job of a fireman in Fahrenheit 451 was to start fires of books deemed inimical to the ruling class.

In 2024, the job of a journalist is to prevent the proles from being exposed to the truth.

Publications and over-the-air news casts are nothing more than extensions of the publisher's opinion. It has been this way for over 100 years as the Pulitzer/Hearst case, Muckrakers and the Yellow Kid taught us. When I was schooled in journalism in the 60s, these subjects were front and center to illustrate the necessity of a free and objective press. Objectivity was under attack at that time by the same people who have finally achieved a total victory. Your example of Fahrenheit 451 is spot on.

 

[beautress]

Would we have any MAGA posting here?

Should Posters be Responsible for the Truthfulness of their Subject Lines, Even if they are Cut and Pasted from a "News" Headline?​

What do you mean by your question? The MAGA originator has been cleared by no less than 6 weaponized false accusations, false narratives, ungrounded impeachments, pompous inquiries, and constant political bitter banter that is unlike any semblance of reality.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What do you mean by your question? The MAGA originator has been cleared by no less than 6 weaponized false accusations, false narratives, ungrounded impeachments, pompous inquiries, and constant political bitter banter that is unlike any semblance of reality.

No, not by reputable and notable agents. He is a sexual assaulter, a business criminal, and is involved in at least four trials. He is going to get juiced. Orange juice!

 

[Concerned American]

No, not by reputable and notable agents. He is a sexual assaulter, a business criminal, and is involved in at least four trials. He is going to get juiced. Orange juice!

Hope you're not being seen in NYC, what you just did to DJT has cost him $5M so far.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Hope you're not being seen in NYC, what you just did to DJT has cost him $5M so far.

What? Telling the truth?

 

[Concerned American]

What? Telling the truth?

Yup. He did. And you, like him, exercised your free speech and opinion rights. That's why all this crap will be overturned on appeal. LMAO.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yup. He did. And you, like him, exercised your free speech and opinion rights. That's why all this crap will be overturned on appeal. LMAO.

language can be criminal and liable, not covered by free speech, when it causes crime and personal injury

 

[Concerned American]

language can be criminal and liable, not covered by free speech, when it causes crime and personal injury

Please link to the crime and the personal injury.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Please link to the crime and the personal injury.

You know the law as well as I do and what I say is true

What you don't like is that your understanding of it is not that of the codified law

So you exclaim your dislike of the status quo. OK.

 

[Concerned American]

You know the law as well as I do and what I say is true

What you don't like is that your understanding of it is not that of the codified law

So you exclaim your dislike of the status quo. OK.

Hide and watch, from what school did you get your shithouse lawyer degree?