“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.

  • slackassassin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Except that it is obviously both wrong and malicious.

      • slackassassin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It leaves out context, intentionally. If this was a fox news headline, I’d say the same thing, and you’d agree.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The context is in the article. It could be argued that it is in the headline too, but some obviously have interpreted it differently.

          Edit: Replace “as” with “while” and maybe you’ll understand.

          • slackassassin
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Indeed.

            Edit: You are just being condescending and not pointing out anything meaningful.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not trying to be condescending. I’m just incapable of explaining this in a satisfactory way. Those criticizing the headline are not pointing out anything meaningful. The information in the article correlates with the headline. Biden has the ability to endorse a ceasefire, “while” his former staffers are urging him to do so.

              • slackassassin
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You are incapable of explaining it because it is an incredibly common and recognizable representation of a bad faith headline.

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Summarizing an article and writing a headline isn’t easy. I know from experience. It may be in bad faith, it doesn’t appear that way to me. It doesn’t detract from the relevant information in the article.

                  • slackassassin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    FWIW I think the administration could, should, and (unfortunately) probably won’t do more to support a cease fire.

                    I just don’t think my opinion justifies misrepresenting what actually occurred in a headline intentionally.

                    And the author of the headline did. They knew. And if you have experience, you know they knew.