|
|
|
|
|
|
by sedor0115
2640 days ago
|
|
|
Don't bother with the "you don't know my politics" shtick, your overly sensitive reaction leaves the writing all over the wall on that point. You wouldn't be so defensive if it didn't strike close to home. This would be less silly if what you were pretending is so obscure and nuanced was not actually as plain as day. I took your invitation to reread, and only needed to go as far as the second paragraph: "In some shots, the teens appear to be shouting “build that wall, build that wall.”" This is false. Not an opinion, not a narrative, a plainly false statement. My "contradictory sources with at least the same level of journalistic respectability" is any of the videos of the event themselves, is that a credible enough source for you? The full-length video was available at the time of the writing of this article and Vox did not make any effort to verify what they wrote against it. They lied, period. This is not that difficult to understand. Do try to keep up. |
|
|
The words "appear to be" in one of the above quotes precisely indicates that this is a statement of opinion, and not a statement of fact. When we say "the wall is blue", we are talking about the color of the wall factually. When we say "the wall appears blue", we are talking about how someone sees the wall, which is a subjective observance; the wall may appear to be a color other than blue to someone else with a different pair of eyes.
At least one word, "is", refers to things as a matter of fact. Other words like "appears", "seems", or the sub-phrase "I think", are indicators that we're probably talking about a statement of opinion. This may be a useful rule to follow when reading news stories. I think it seems relevant here. (SwIdt?)