3 ms·
>> it was $6B for a specific 42M person subset. > Nope. That's a CNN blunder An assertion that CNN made a blunder about $6B toward the 42M facing starvation -
by WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
>> it was $6B for a specific 42M person subset.
> Nope. That's a CNN blunder
An assertion that CNN made a blunder about $6B toward the 42M facing starvation - is false.
By offering a broad correction that wasn't limited to the one-word CNN error, the whole of your post became non-factual.
- Jugurtha 5y agoHere's another headline >The UN says $6B from the world's billionaires could solve a hunger crisis. Elon Musk says he will sell Tesla stock and donate proceeds if the UN can prove that. From this link: https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-says-6b-worlds-billionaires-031016473.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-says-6b-worlds-billionaires-03... Are we arguing that news headlines are not the resposibility of news organizations? Bear in mind, that headline is recent. Should we still go with Occam's razor here, or is this a clear attempt to get clicks, you know, given the fact that this headline came way after the correction but still commits the same "mistake" which is more click inducing than stating the facts ? >By offering a broad correction that wasn't limited to the one-word CNN error, the whole of your post became non-factual. What does that even mean?