4 ms·

What you call "awful click-bait", I call "literally true as stated". The Sacramento sheriff is, in fact, sharing license plate reader data with anti-abortion st

What you call "awful click-bait", I call "literally true as stated". The Sacramento sheriff is, in fact, sharing license plate reader data with anti-abortion states. If you have a problem with that headline, I suspect your actual motivation might be to try and squash news you find inconvenient.

gotoeleven 3y ago
The Analemma_ school of journalism is why no one trusts the news anymore.
orangecat 3y ago
Come on. If a politician argues in favor of universal health care, would it be reasonable for a headline to say "John Doe supports taxpayer-funded medical treatments for child abusers"?
- whatshisface 3y ago
  On the other hand, it would not be so dishonest to characterize an unremovable app that tracked your location 24/7 as an app that tracked your location 24/7 "for abusive partners." (Because, guess what they end up being used for.)
  - InSteady 3y ago
    No you don't understand, if I have a single gripe or nit-pick about an article then the headline is automatically clickbait. Now lets talk about the headline ad nauseum instead of discussing the issues at hand (rinse, repeat for every contentious issue posted on HN or reddit).
- tevon 3y ago
  This is an excellent counter-example. Taking a strong subset of the truth may be factually correct but doesn't stand up to the standard of "the truth". Likely because the headline implies intent (or expects its audience to assume intent), where it doesn't appear any intent exists.
  - InSteady 3y ago
    The truth is that anti-abortion states have made it extremely clear that they are willing to go to great lengths to criminalize personal healthcare decisions (one of the most important ones a person can make in their life). They will use this data to victimize the women unfortunate enough to live in those states and experience an unwanted pregnancy. It's not a matter of if, only when. The headline is exactly as accurate as it needs to be. If healthcare included the guaranteed right to a treatment where of adults spend therapeutic time at preschools, then a headline about providing healthcare to sex offenders would absolutely be relevant (as well as obviously truthful).
    - laserlight 3y ago
      > The headline is exactly as accurate as it needs to be. I disagree. Here's a simple modification I propose that's more accurate: “Sacramento Sheriff is sharing license plate reader data with states, including anti-abortion ones, records show”
      - InSteady 3y ago
        Wordiness is not always a virtue. The absence of your specific phrasing does not imply what you seem to think it implies. If you read a headline and make a bunch of assumptions that is on you. This is beyond criticism of clickbait and getting into pearl-clutching over minor semantics. You can nit-pick just about every headline that is pithy enough to be fit for print for omitting important details and context from the story. That's why headlines and articles fill distinct roles within journalism. Go figure.
- tinypigdr 3y ago
  [dead]
slg 3y ago
This is more burying the lede than clickbait. The situation is actually worse than initially reported. They are just using abortion as an example because many people would find that as the most objectionable "legitimate" use of this technology and policy. It also being used for other purposes doesn't invalidate that concern regarding abortion. It helps show why the concern in the case of abortion should apply to the overall practice. That is likely the EFF's plan here. The abortion framing of this issue is coming from the EFF and not the media.
laminarflow 3y ago
Regardless of one's political orientation, most examples of "fake news" are in fact "literally true as stated". The broader question is whether we should endeavor to present the news holistically. It is newsworthy that certain CA precincts might be unlawfully sharing license plate data, and if SacBee is significantly under-reporting the extent of the sharing -- which is the main focus of the story -- in favor of their interpretation of the sharing, that is editorializing.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  >most examples of "fake news" are in fact "literally true as stated" Nah, most fake news I run into is stuff like "The Russians destroyed 37 HIMARS" or "<place>'s school has a litterbox for a furry student" or "Trans people are hurting your kids"
  - clarge1120 3y ago
    Your bias is showing.
baryphonic 3y ago
The headline is a half-truth, since "anti-abortion states" is clearly irrelevant to the sheriff's behavior. This would be a bit like a headline including the phrase "serial killer trained at Harvard" to refer to Ted Kaczynski. I loathe Harvard, but I couldn't honestly claim that the nexus of Harvard and Kaczynski had any relevance to his terror campaign. So, yeah, GP had a solid basis for objecting to the headline. Certainly one beyond the cynical, borderline clairvoyant explanation given.
projektfu 3y ago
I think it gets read as the sheriff intentionally doing it for anti-abortion purposes. This is because the sheriff is a synecdoche in the sentence but gets read as a person.
chrismcb 3y ago
But the problem isn't that they are sharing the data with anti abortion states. The problem is that they are sharing data. Why distract from the issue by throwing in a non issue, a hypothetical that won't be an issue? Bring up the real issue. Why do they even have this information to begin with?

gotoeleven 3y ago

The Analemma_ school of journalism is why no one trusts the news anymore.

orangecat 3y ago

Come on. If a politician argues in favor of universal health care, would it be reasonable for a headline to say "John Doe supports taxpayer-funded medical treatments for child abusers"?

whatshisface 3y ago
On the other hand, it would not be so dishonest to characterize an unremovable app that tracked your location 24/7 as an app that tracked your location 24/7 "for abusive partners." (Because, guess what they end up being used for.)
- InSteady 3y ago
  No you don't understand, if I have a single gripe or nit-pick about an article then the headline is automatically clickbait. Now lets talk about the headline ad nauseum instead of discussing the issues at hand (rinse, repeat for every contentious issue posted on HN or reddit).
tevon 3y ago
This is an excellent counter-example. Taking a strong subset of the truth may be factually correct but doesn't stand up to the standard of "the truth". Likely because the headline implies intent (or expects its audience to assume intent), where it doesn't appear any intent exists.
- InSteady 3y ago
  The truth is that anti-abortion states have made it extremely clear that they are willing to go to great lengths to criminalize personal healthcare decisions (one of the most important ones a person can make in their life). They will use this data to victimize the women unfortunate enough to live in those states and experience an unwanted pregnancy. It's not a matter of if, only when. The headline is exactly as accurate as it needs to be. If healthcare included the guaranteed right to a treatment where of adults spend therapeutic time at preschools, then a headline about providing healthcare to sex offenders would absolutely be relevant (as well as obviously truthful).
  - laserlight 3y ago
    > The headline is exactly as accurate as it needs to be. I disagree. Here's a simple modification I propose that's more accurate: “Sacramento Sheriff is sharing license plate reader data with states, including anti-abortion ones, records show”
    - InSteady 3y ago
      Wordiness is not always a virtue. The absence of your specific phrasing does not imply what you seem to think it implies. If you read a headline and make a bunch of assumptions that is on you. This is beyond criticism of clickbait and getting into pearl-clutching over minor semantics. You can nit-pick just about every headline that is pithy enough to be fit for print for omitting important details and context from the story. That's why headlines and articles fill distinct roles within journalism. Go figure.
tinypigdr 3y ago
[dead]

slg 3y ago

This is more burying the lede than clickbait. The situation is actually worse than initially reported. They are just using abortion as an example because many people would find that as the most objectionable "legitimate" use of this technology and policy. It also being used for other purposes doesn't invalidate that concern regarding abortion. It helps show why the concern in the case of abortion should apply to the overall practice. That is likely the EFF's plan here. The abortion framing of this issue is coming from the EFF and not the media.

laminarflow 3y ago

Regardless of one's political orientation, most examples of "fake news" are in fact "literally true as stated". The broader question is whether we should endeavor to present the news holistically. It is newsworthy that certain CA precincts might be unlawfully sharing license plate data, and if SacBee is significantly under-reporting the extent of the sharing -- which is the main focus of the story -- in favor of their interpretation of the sharing, that is editorializing.

mrguyorama 3y ago
>most examples of "fake news" are in fact "literally true as stated" Nah, most fake news I run into is stuff like "The Russians destroyed 37 HIMARS" or "<place>'s school has a litterbox for a furry student" or "Trans people are hurting your kids"
- clarge1120 3y ago
  Your bias is showing.

baryphonic 3y ago

The headline is a half-truth, since "anti-abortion states" is clearly irrelevant to the sheriff's behavior. This would be a bit like a headline including the phrase "serial killer trained at Harvard" to refer to Ted Kaczynski. I loathe Harvard, but I couldn't honestly claim that the nexus of Harvard and Kaczynski had any relevance to his terror campaign. So, yeah, GP had a solid basis for objecting to the headline. Certainly one beyond the cynical, borderline clairvoyant explanation given.

projektfu 3y ago

I think it gets read as the sheriff intentionally doing it for anti-abortion purposes. This is because the sheriff is a synecdoche in the sentence but gets read as a person.

chrismcb 3y ago

But the problem isn't that they are sharing the data with anti abortion states. The problem is that they are sharing data. Why distract from the issue by throwing in a non issue, a hypothetical that won't be an issue? Bring up the real issue. Why do they even have this information to begin with?