Note:

I swapped the original article at the request of a mod to from a source deemed more reliable, but to avoid confusion when reading the comment section prior to this edit, here is the link to the original article. I chose the Relief Web source listed by some who commented. Cheers!

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    I would like the articles referenced here in this community to be fact-based, and I would like our discussion to be based on reality. The situation is bad enough as it is without having to make things up

    • المنطقة عكف عفريت@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      While I see what you mean by that, is the title being “biased” equal to the article being biased? Seems like all doubts are resolved upon reading the first paragraph.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Most people don’t read the articles, they read titles and they take the inference and go to the comments and fight. Titles that are misleading are effectively lies.

        In the propaganda war, titles are ammunition

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yes. Misleading title is a lie. Putting that lie into the title of our community makes this entire discussion premised on a lie. Most people are not going to read the article, and the hasbara / propaganda of the title still gets the eyeballs. So it is a net negative