|
|
|
|
|
by AmericanChopper
2165 days ago
|
|
News outlets have been doing this since long before Twitter was a thing. Any time you hear/read “x is facing criticism...”, “x is under pressure...”, “x is being praised...”, “many people are saying...”, “people familiar with the issue...”, “inside/anonymous sources...”, “x calls for...”, “experts say/warn...”, everything you hear/read after that point is 100% curated editorial opinion, and news outlets have been pedalling that for at least as long as I’ve been old enough to read the news. Those kinds of statements are so vague that they’re pretty much always guaranteed to be true, so you don’t even need to provide a factual basis for them, but before Twitter news outlets would just go and interview random uninformed passers by on the street and gather a couple of good common-man sound bites to reinforce whatever bad opinion it is they’re pushing. My favourite technique that I’ve seen become more common over the past few years is to print an article claiming “x is facing online death threats” for anybody they want to generate some sympathetic support for. Are such headlines true? Almost certainly. Would that headline be true for any public figure you can possibly think of? Almost certainly. |
|