Most journalism tip-toes around this line by declining to assert direct cause. They use terms like “after” instead of “because” as it specifically does not impl

Most journalism tip-toes around this line by declining to assert direct cause. They use terms like “after” instead of “because” as it specifically does not imply a link, only the order in which two events (possibly related) occurred. Others you might see, “experts say” and “possible link”. I’m not commenting on the ethical implications of this usage, only the specific mechanisms they use to avoid assigning cause in the event that they end up wrong.