Honestly even putting this nonsense in a headline is negligent.
They’re complicit and they know it. Its better for profits this way.
The6 are going to run the country. We need ti known what these people think
It’s called the 24/7 news cycle. They need to keep pumping out trash like this otherwise they might not improve their profit margins.
Maybe we shouldn’t inform the population about this… And any other of Trump’s plans since they’re so obviously bad they don’t need explanation?
Simply irresponsible to not do so, especially after an election where so much of the population were convinced Trump would be better for the economy. If anything we should be working harder to inform people, not looking for reasons to avoid these topics. What if someone saw that RFK would be doing this and saw no counter to his misinformation? Because it’s below someone to even discuss?
It’s a duty to inform people, and I’m glad poynter is taking the initiative.
To support this counterpoint, this is exactly the headline my moron coworker would click and MAYBE get corrected in his stance on fluoridated water
Thank you. The number of up votes the comments get saying that we shouldn’t even bother discussing this are staggering.
Yeah that’s crazy to me. Of course it’s sad that we are at this point but to suggest that the article shouldn’t be written is just silly. What’s the alternative? Just isolate ourselves in our little echo chambers? People aren’t as intelligent as we’d like to believe. Moreover, confirmation bias and selective reasoning are strong behavioral forces. There has to be some middle ground between grossly unprofessional profit seeking and state run media.
Yea I mean, Poynter is a non-profit fact checking and journalism institute… They launched IFCN. Square all those accusations you’re seeing around here for me :)
You think this is stupid?
RFK Jr. also thinks cell phones and 5G cause cancer. So get ready for an America with slow cell data and phones you’re not allowed to put up to your ear.
I heard him tell a bullshit story about how he has hundreds of clients with grapefruit-sized tumors behind their ears from using cell phones. You know how you see all those people walking around with giant tumors behind their ears? Me neither.
That’s just cause you don’t get invited to the whale juice parties
I can get all the whale juice I want in the ocean anyway.
But I bet you can’t get bear cub corpses in the ocean, can you?
Not with that attitude.
So get ready for an America with slow cell data and phones you’re not allowed to put up to your ear.
Hello EDGE, my old friend…
To be fair, people with tumors behind their ears will likely hide it to avoid assholes staring/taking pictures. I don’t see many cancer patients attending chemotherapy either because they are wearing hats/wigs.
Still, shouldn’t they get cancer on their hands instead? That’s the closest body part to your phone at any time on average, isn’t it?
But don’t report on those things, because it’s irresponsible to do that. It’s simply to fill the 24/7 news cycle, not to inform anyone (despite this being a fact checking institute). /s
What is going on in this sub?
You can’t give a platform or a stage to these people. You’re disrespecting your own journalism when you do.
They don’t even put the answer in the title, this is peak irresponsible journalism.
this is peak clickbait and irresponsible journalism.
FTFY
Well, yes. If you want to correct people being lied to by clickbait, the best way to reach them with the truth is also going to be clickbait. You’re not the target audience.
And any question in a headline can be answered with no. Otherwise it would be a statement.
Better let the misinformation go uncountered, right?
Every time I see a question in a news headline, I just answer it with “no.” in my head and move on. 90% of the time it’s the same answer the article arrives at and the other 10% of the time, I’ll see a real headline about it from other sources anyway–with the actual lede in the title.
Awesome, I didn’t know this
It might be beneficial for some to understand the “what” and “why” behind the “no,” no?
Sure, but why not just lead with a negative assertion instead of implying that there’s an open question? The question implies that there is controversy, even when none exists.
Fact Checking RFK Jr’s False Claims About Fluoride
Would be a perfectly acceptable headline.
The title poses the claim in question from a neutral standpoint, and presents it’s fact checking case in the article. I don’t agree with the idea that a controversy is implied simply by doing that, or that there is an open question implied either. That is not apparent to me whatsoever, and I think this is a personal opinion rather than anything concrete. By reading the article, that is confirmed, and the reader also gains a lot of additional information on the matter.
Answer is No. This is junk science
For any article with a question as a headline, the answer is no.
Yes but my cousin’s friend’s daughter once prayed about it and it was true… so like , er, CHECKING MATE… er ? Right?
Not American but I feel like at this point I’d get a four year supply of popcorn and try to encourage the dumbest shit I’ve ever seen.
Eg. Hulk Hogan should be head of the EPA. Start a campaign and mock outrage when trump is silent on the matter.
I’d start asking for a ban in vaccines and to make tinfoil hats mandatory to protect your brain from the microwaves of he deep state that want to control your mind.
Why not hulk head up the DHS? Department of Hulkland Security!
The guy had worms in his brain! IQ loss is like second nature to him
No.
