4 ms·
> As pointed out below[0], this is a sensationalist headline and should be changed. The title was based on the entirety of the linked content — the letter from
by jader201 7y ago
> As pointed out below[0], this is a sensationalist headline and should be changed.
The title was based on the entirety of the linked content — the letter from the CA governor to the president — which included no context around the numbers being based on no measures being taken.
- jdminhbg 7y agoUnderstandable, but since there's been clarification, I think that should be reflected in the title.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- jader201 7y agoI would disagree that the title should be changed, since the linked content does not reflect the additional context you’re referring to. I suppose a more fully-qualified title might append “in letter to the president”. But appending “if no measures are taken” is not accurate, since this article — his letter to the president — doesn’t include this context. Saying the title is sensationalist is equivalent to saying the letter is sensationalist. And if that is the case, the most you could say is a sensationalist title accurately represents a sensationalist letter.
- jdminhbg 7y agoGenerally the HN style has been to actively editorialize to tone down sensationalism, even if the linked title or content is sensationalist.
- sneak 7y agoI think GP was suggesting that the letter is itself not sensationalist, and thus neither is the title as it accurately reflects the content linked, and thus it is fine as-is. I agree, it is a reasonable statement and reasonable projection (within an order of magnitude) that reflects the gravity of the situation. A lot of people don’t seem to realize just how big this is about to become.
- _jahh 7y agoi think the measures most places have taken are going to reduce the spread significantly(USA, 2000 instead of 2 million deaths), i pray.