[zrth]

The Wikipedia source you liked to contradicts what you wrote.

You write: 'knocking a whole train off of a bridge and killing everybody on board'

Wikipedia writes: 'The two trains derailed each other, and four cars fell off the viaduct. 40 people were killed, at least 192 were injured, 12 of which were severe injuries.'

[Mizza]

Okay, it killed 40 people and injured 192. It doesn't change my point. "Killing lots of people on board."

[dippersauce]

It doesn’t have to change your point to severely reduce a reader’s confidence in it. A kind reader would say that difference in detail is hyperbole with the intent to incite an emotional response. A less kind reader would call making up details to better suit your narrative a form of lying. Yes they covered up the train incident, and yes it was despicable and horrible they did so. That aspect is not my problem, it’s the deliberate choice of words to foster not discussion, but outrage. It makes me question your entire narrative and intent before I’ve even had a chance to consider it.

[Mizza]

Part of the reason that I didn't know is that while it was unfolding, the state told news reporters not to cover it in detail - the implication was the everybody had died, and that it was not to be discussed any further. I had not looked at the case since. It is fortunate that more people were not harmed, given how many people were on the train.

Truth is hard to come by in China.