3 ms·

I saw this same headline on Reddit World News and it made me pretty angry. The headline was something along the lines of "World votes to abolish nuclear weapons

I saw this same headline on Reddit World News and it made me pretty angry. The headline was something along the lines of "World votes to abolish nuclear weapons, 9 nuclear powers including US vote no". Why "including the US" ? This is just clearly pushing an agenda. Why not "including France" ? What does this little snippet add to the journalism other than to press a little bit on anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment? Really annoying.

andrepd 9y ago
The US being in board or not makes the difference between this being a joke, or actually having some kind of force or influence. France signing this agreement or not matters fuck all. There's that little difference. It's very relevant whether the USA signed it or not. Nothing to do with anti-US sentiment so no need to burst an artery just yet.
- muninn_ 9y ago
  No it's not. Because without France, UK, Russia, China as well then no treaty on nukes matters.
rfrey 9y ago
The headline is relevant because the US is the most powerful military force in the world, and also involved in more conflicts than any other nation. The US position is more relevant than any other nation's.
bnegreve 9y ago
Reddit is an us-based media, so this is not surprising that articles are targeted for this audience. If you believe Reddit is an universal and unbiased media, you're wrong. > Why not "including France" ? What does this little snippet add to the journalism other than to press a little bit on anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment? Changing "including US" to "including France" would not reduce the anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment because France is part of Europe. edit: remove pointless comment.
- muninn_ 9y ago
  I don't believe it to be unbiased. >How does changing "including US" to "including France" would help reducing the anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment? I'm afraid I understand what's going on. What do you think is going on? I don't think either title is good. I just wanted to illustrate the point.
AlphaSite 9y ago
Because it’s probably posted by an American, for American audiences, of course you would highlight the detail which matters to yourself.

andrepd 9y ago

The US being in board or not makes the difference between this being a joke, or actually having some kind of force or influence. France signing this agreement or not matters fuck all. There's that little difference. It's very relevant whether the USA signed it or not. Nothing to do with anti-US sentiment so no need to burst an artery just yet.

muninn_ 9y ago
No it's not. Because without France, UK, Russia, China as well then no treaty on nukes matters.

rfrey 9y ago

The headline is relevant because the US is the most powerful military force in the world, and also involved in more conflicts than any other nation. The US position is more relevant than any other nation's.

bnegreve 9y ago

Reddit is an us-based media, so this is not surprising that articles are targeted for this audience. If you believe Reddit is an universal and unbiased media, you're wrong. > Why not "including France" ? What does this little snippet add to the journalism other than to press a little bit on anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment? Changing "including US" to "including France" would not reduce the anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment because France is part of Europe. edit: remove pointless comment.

muninn_ 9y ago
I don't believe it to be unbiased. >How does changing "including US" to "including France" would help reducing the anti-Europe/anti-Us sentiment? I'm afraid I understand what's going on. What do you think is going on? I don't think either title is good. I just wanted to illustrate the point.

AlphaSite 9y ago

Because it’s probably posted by an American, for American audiences, of course you would highlight the detail which matters to yourself.