3 ms·
I mean, yes, headline might be misleading but it's not "100% exact opposite of what the headline implies". The headline ("Visually impaired Paralympian hit by s
by capableweb 5y ago
I mean, yes, headline might be misleading but it's not "100% exact opposite of what the headline implies". The headline ("Visually impaired Paralympian hit by self-driving bus") implies that someone was hit by something, that something was a self-driving bus. All of that is true, and is what happened. What's left out though, is whoose fault it was, it's not part of the headline at all. One might think it was because of the self-driving system instead of a human, but it wasn't.
So yes, misleading/clickbait it was, but not "100% exact opposite".
- alexgmcm 5y agoIt should just say "hit by bus" given the self-driving nature of the bus had nothing to do with the incident and in fact would have prevented it. But that wouldn't be news. It matters because most people will just read the headline and go away thinking self-driving technology is dangerous.
- d0gbread 5y agoSort of disagree... It's a misleading title but the fact that it's self-driving is what makes this story interesting. Title should have added 'after human intervention' for more clarity rather than less.