• WarmSoda
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    4 months ago

    Is the headline not part of an article?

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      When one says a publication is grossly misleading, it certainly implies the entire publication

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          You’re not wrong, but we also should stop excusing, normalizing, and accepting wildly exaggerated for sales purposes titles of articles.

          • intensely_human
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            We should stop accepting lies.

            Unless there is some way this reaction actually did produce twice the energy input, it’s not misleading it’s a lie.

      • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why have we accepted the standard of misleading headlines? “Oh well you didn’t read the article, I guess you and 90% of eyeballs get to be fundamentally misinformed” is an unhinged take.

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          I never said a misleading headline was acceptable. I said the publication is not misleading and that it covers the criticisms dude up above was leveling.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            It is misleading, for someone to be misleading they must mislead, and the headline misleads.

          • No_
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            You didn’t say it, but when someone else did you became extremely pedantic, “corrected them” to maintain your perceived moral high ground, and straight up invented a strawman to not have to discuss it.

            So you basically did say it.

              • No_
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                Your entire comment is about correcting OP. None of it addresses the headline. That’s a strawman.

                • protist@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  but the publications are grossly misleading

                  I think you’re only referencing the headline, the article itself clearly states what you said

                  This one? Where I say the publication is not misleading, only the headline? You don’t understand what a strawman is.

                  Your comment history indicates you’re pervasively angry about little things like this. What’s up with that?

                  • No_
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    When you think looking at someone’s comment history is valid as an argument lmao. Just add ad hominem to the list. Or are you going to climb on a second high horse and say I don’t know what that is either? You’re a clown.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        “article” vs “publication”

        Two different things.

        The link takes you to an article. Publications are in actual scientific journals, not intended for popular consumption.

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      What was your question? I only read “is the” and thought I could base my response off of only that.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      When I see “publication” I assume it’s the actual scientific paper and not the article reporting on said paper.

      • WarmSoda
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s a great point. I absolutely agree with you on that.

    • Danksy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It’s easier to nitpick than it is to interact with the actual argument.

      I agree with you. The headline is misleading, and I think it devalues the article.