Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Mainly, IMHO, sensationalist "journalism" like this is much more of a reason why we can't have nice things, compared to the actual event predicted (which likely isn't going to happen, at least not to the extent described).


sort by: page size:

The article is seemingly sensationalist for the sake of sensationalism?

To me the article reads like an extension of current popular news stories.. which don't all reflect reality.

The paragraph after the heading 'Why This Matters' sort of addresses the fact that it is anecdotal and how it might still have significance.

Personally I find the article does read a bit like scaremongering propaganda.


It's a sensationalist article from a mainstream newspaper.

Some mention needs to be made of how unreasonably sensationalized the article is.

Yeah this article seems sensational to the point of being deliberately misleading.

Sensationalist article.

it is not clear from the article whether it is real or hypothetical, which marks this down as atrocious reporting

Don't take an article like this at face value, they will omit any complicating or narrative disruptive facts and will often mislead with regards to cause and effect or timing (via omission or phrase juxtaposition).

> Seems like pretty wild, sensationalist reporting here.

One might even say -- "deceptive"


"The sky is falling"

Maybe it is, or maybe not yet. Regardless, the article is awfully light on actual data and reads more like scaremongering gossip.

0/10 would not read again.


The first "damning" sentence throws out a sensationalistic claim about "bloodshed and suffering".

This is not mentioned again in the article, is certainly not substantiated in the article, and doesn't look like it's substantiated anywhere else on the site, either.

Sensationalist much?


Agreed, the article is grossly inaccurate and sensationalized.

True. Which leads us back to that it is a "Misleading sensationalist headline." as somebody else mentioned here.

What's the "truth" behind the headline then? Genuine question, I totally agree that it sounds a bit "too bad to be true" especially without more context. But what's the other side of this story?

It really does read like a scare mongering fear article. Including mention of problems but no concrete followup with current details, or at the very least a mention of no resolution to the issue as of a specific time of fact-finding.

> the article makes it sound like nobody has even the slightest clue that this stuff is possible

It's almost as if the news has some sort of agenda!


Like I said, it's a sensationalist article. Without knowing the composition and quantities involved, it's impossible to say anything with certainty.

Agreed. Based on the headline I was expecting the journalist had inadvertently revealed some data about which they weren't intending to.
next

Legal | privacy