▲ 120 ▼ The liberal mind cannot comprehend the concept of planning (lemmy.ml) submitted 5 months ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/funny@lemmy.ml 82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Fancy_Gecko@lemmy.ml 16 points 5 months ago (6 children) headline matters permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -10 points 5 months ago (5 children) Acknowledging a metro station in the middle of nowhere, in response to circulating pictures of it, is not really misleading at all. Headlines matter in getting people to read your article. The headline is accurate, and the article doesn't ridicule the station, it just addresses it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (3 children) The misleading part is “middle of nowhere” instead of “active construction site planned to house x million people in the future” because that would make it look like a future plan instead of dystopian. I think you’re lying if you say you don’t understand that’s what this article/headline is implying. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -3 points 5 months ago (2 children) You can think what you like, but that's a deeply paranoid perspective. It's just normal light journalism. Context matters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child) Oh, so now I’m paranoid! Sure, context matters and that’s exactly why this being out of context is negative framing at best; that’s not paranoid and it’s how media works, you can generate more clicks based on your headlines and thumbnails & that’s why things are framed certain ways. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago How can you simultaneously play dumb and act condescending? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -10 points 5 months ago (5 children) Acknowledging a metro station in the middle of nowhere, in response to circulating pictures of it, is not really misleading at all. Headlines matter in getting people to read your article. The headline is accurate, and the article doesn't ridicule the station, it just addresses it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (3 children) The misleading part is “middle of nowhere” instead of “active construction site planned to house x million people in the future” because that would make it look like a future plan instead of dystopian. I think you’re lying if you say you don’t understand that’s what this article/headline is implying. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -3 points 5 months ago (2 children) You can think what you like, but that's a deeply paranoid perspective. It's just normal light journalism. Context matters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child) Oh, so now I’m paranoid! Sure, context matters and that’s exactly why this being out of context is negative framing at best; that’s not paranoid and it’s how media works, you can generate more clicks based on your headlines and thumbnails & that’s why things are framed certain ways. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago How can you simultaneously play dumb and act condescending? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (3 children) The misleading part is “middle of nowhere” instead of “active construction site planned to house x million people in the future” because that would make it look like a future plan instead of dystopian. I think you’re lying if you say you don’t understand that’s what this article/headline is implying. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -3 points 5 months ago (2 children) You can think what you like, but that's a deeply paranoid perspective. It's just normal light journalism. Context matters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child) Oh, so now I’m paranoid! Sure, context matters and that’s exactly why this being out of context is negative framing at best; that’s not paranoid and it’s how media works, you can generate more clicks based on your headlines and thumbnails & that’s why things are framed certain ways. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -3 points 5 months ago (2 children) You can think what you like, but that's a deeply paranoid perspective. It's just normal light journalism. Context matters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child) Oh, so now I’m paranoid! Sure, context matters and that’s exactly why this being out of context is negative framing at best; that’s not paranoid and it’s how media works, you can generate more clicks based on your headlines and thumbnails & that’s why things are framed certain ways. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child) Oh, so now I’m paranoid! Sure, context matters and that’s exactly why this being out of context is negative framing at best; that’s not paranoid and it’s how media works, you can generate more clicks based on your headlines and thumbnails & that’s why things are framed certain ways. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago Yes, paranoid. In this specific case, the station had already gone viral for being in the middle of nowhere. That was not an original framing by the author, it was an existing framing that they gave context for. If anything, their framing is positive, since they explained that while it looked bizarre, it had a rational explanation. Maybe if they came up with the "middle of nowhere" framing themself, you'd have a point. But they didn't. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago How can you simultaneously play dumb and act condescending? permalink fedilink source parent
