this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
336 points (97.5% liked)

News

23376 readers
2120 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If they can't get that simple distinction correct, what does that say about the rest of their reporting?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's a distinction without meaningful difference. Yes, a revolver is very different from a semi-auto pistol. Yay, congrats on being factually correct. Are they both lethal devices that can misfire/accidentally fire/easily be fired with a trigger pull? Because THAT is the point of the article.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If none of the facts need to be correct except that police pointed a gun at someone's head, why read the other 2000+ words in the article?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Where did I say none of the facts need to be correct? Nowhere, that's where.

The important stuff needs to be clear, but the type of gun is not nearly as important as the fact the guy was restrained on the ground with a gun (any type of gun) to his head. Other facts that are more important than the type of gun are what led up to the events, whether the guy was still armed but only restrained, the color of the individuals in question, etc. The type of gun is so far down the list of details that need to be correct that I wouldn't even expect it to be mentioned other than "gun."

Also, even more important is the fact the story had the correct type of gun, only the title (not written by the journalist) is incorrect.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If they get one "unimportant" fact wrong, then why should I trust the "important" facts?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If a journalist can't get the basic fact of revolver vs Glock right, what other basic facts have they misrepresented?

thats why factual accuracy in news stories is important, especially if the weapon in question is the articles thumbnail, making it the first thing many will notice

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The journalist DID get the correct type of gun. The title is not written by the journalist and is the only place revolver is used.

And the way you say, "what other basic facts have they misrepresented" makes it seem like you think this was an intentional thing to skew the story. Only gun nerds will care about that detail, so the editor/copy person who actually wrote the headline likely did no research at all and just used what normal people think of as a generic term for a gun. The point is that the type of gun is not important. Just like if the person had said the officer was wearing a cotton shirt under his uniform when it was actually a poly-cotton blend, it's not 100% accurate but it doesn't change the point.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The journalist DID get the correct type of gun. The title is not written by the journalist and is the only place revolver is used.

It's in the subtitle, and it was produced by the news organization alongside the article. It's part of the article as released by the journalistic news outlet, it impacts the story, and it's embarrassing

And the way you say, "what other basic facts have they misrepresented" makes it seem like you think this was an intentional thing to skew the stor

Nice assumption, don't read shit into what other people say and you won't get it wrong. My point wasn't that it's purposefully wrong at all, just that it is wrong, and an insanely basic thing to get wrong. Assume incompetence before malice, you know?

Only gun nerds will care about that detail

Lol, completely untrue. My wife has no idea about guns and her first comment was that the gun in the thumbnail wasn't a revolver and she chuckled. It's a really basic fact to fuck up

so the editor/copy person who actually wrote the headline likely did no research at all

Exactly? If the person doing the tag line for the article couldn't be bothered to not make a basic error fixed with a 2s web search: why should you trust that the person who wrote the article did, or was checked properly?

The point is that the type of gun is not important

The point is that I learned in my journalism classes that missing basic facts like this erodes trust in you as a news source, for obvious reasons. Well, obvious to people with half a brain, anyway.

Just like if the person had said the officer was wearing a cotton shirt under his uniform when it was actually a poly-cotton blend, it's not 100% accurate but it doesn't change the point.

Absolutely not the same at all. What the office wore underneath his uniform is nether relevant nor in the thumbnail next to the article title. The type of gun is both of those things

Again, it's a very simple concept: if the news source cannot be assed to do a basic fact check on their title when it's blatantly false by their own thumbnail then they cannot be trusted to fact check jack shit

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

You complete me.