"As the president of the United States, you have power to change the course of history, and the responsibility to save lives right now," the staffers wrote.

“As the president of the United States, you have power to change the course of history, and the responsibility to save lives right now,” the staffers wrote.

    • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.caEnglish
      284·
      10 months ago

      It doesn’t matter what the intent is here, the headline is misleading, which is poor journalist integrity. Both malice and ignorance can sink a ship.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
        533·
        10 months ago

        Intent is irrelevant. Biden’s comment and the staffer’s letter correlate (A relationship or connection between two things based on co-occurrence or pattern of change). It is implied (To make evident indirectly) that Biden is disregarding the wishes of the staffers. If you can’t comprehend this, I can’t help you read gooderer.

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.caEnglish
          172·
          10 months ago

          It is implied

          Someone did the implying, and that’s bad practice. You are correct that intent is irrelevant, yet you take issue with the headline being accused of intentional misinformation.

          The thing about implications is that they exists regardless of your intent or your audience’s comprehension. It doesn’t matter if the headline is technically correct, if a significant portion of the audience leaves misinformed, that’s poor jounalism. The extent to which this happens here edges into malpractice, either from ignorance or malice.

          Since you take issue with the accusation, you either disagree with the claim of malice or the claim of misinformation; as you reject the former you must disagree that a headline that gives a drastically different interpretation of reality is misinformation. Am I wrong?