5 ms·
The title has been editorialized enough that it’s inaccurate. Actual title: Capitol Riot Prompts Some Big Banks and Companies to Pause Political Funding Subti
by troydavis 6y ago
The title has been editorialized enough that it’s inaccurate.
Actual title: Capitol Riot Prompts Some Big Banks and Companies to Pause Political Funding
Subtitle: JPMorgan and Citigroup to halt all PAC donations; Blue Cross and Marriott pause funding to Republicans who objected to Electoral College results
- jimmy2020 6y agoIt's from the Subtitle and the content of the article. How is it inaccurate?
- troydavis 6y agoJPM and Citi are pausing their own donations to all PACs, regardless of party, not donations to specific Republican candidates or to only Republican PACs.
- jimmy2020 6y agoThis is the subtitle form wsj: "JPMorgan and Citigroup to halt all PAC donations; Blue Cross and Marriott pause funding to Republicans who objected to Electoral College results" edit: This is from CNN: Corporate America halts donations to Republicans who voted to overturn the election https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/10/business/citigroup-bluecross-commerce-bank-pac-donations/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/10/business/citigroup-bluecr...
- troydavis 6y agoThanks for providing the CNN link as well. Submitting WSJ’s own subtitle of “JPMorgan and Citigroup to halt all PAC donations” seems like it would have avoided the confusion entirely - it’s clear and accurate.
- jimmy2020 6y agoso did the title here, it’s clear and accurate. I recommend reading the full story though before accusing me of being inaccurate.
- troydavis 6y agoFor the sake of completeness.. I did read the full story. The title you chose has a significantly different meaning than the title and content of the WSJ article, though. The WSJ article says that these banks are pausing all political funding to PACs, which is much different than pausing only funding of specific Republicans. Not funding any PACs means that the banks don’t want to be involved in party politics at all right now. On the other hand, not funding specific candidates or a specific party would be a statement about those entities. The WSJ’s word choice also conveys that these banks are halting their own donations, not refusing to process all donations. I hope that explains why the WSJ’s “all PAC donations” is much different than this submission’s “funding the Republicans who objected.”
- jimmy2020 6y ago1- This is from the story title "..pause funding to Republicans who objected to Electoral College" So I didn't invent something new. 2- CNN story has exactly the same title that I chose here. 3- the story itself about Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley. Yet, you see it differently, because there's "all". And blame me for the poor choice. Well, I didn't see that coming.