• EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    The title is never going to be specific enough to remove all ability to misinterpret it. The title just tells you what the article is about. The article itself gives you all the necessary details. I agree that it shouldn’t be misleading, and in the case I think it could be improved, but that doesn’t change the fact that one should refrain from passing judgment about what happened based on a headline. If you don’t have the time to read the article, you also lack the time to form an valid opinion about what happened.

    • Syrc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sure, I agree, but unfortunately the human mind is prone to jumping to conclusions, especially when they fit their narrative. One should always be sure of what happened before forming an opinion on it, but sometimes you “get the feeling you’re sure” even when you don’t have all the necessary information.

      Just look at how widespread the “Biden doesn’t know the alphabet” thing got when the original was very clearly satire.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I understand that confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. But we are talking about just making sure you are even just mildly informed before forming an opinion you think is valid.

        • Syrc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          The thing is, a lot of times people think they’re informed enough even when they aren’t. There isn’t a clear indicator of “how informed” you are on any subject, and self-assessment is a faulty thing. The Dunning-Kruger effect probably plays a part in that too.