• deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      You can think what you like, but that’s a deeply paranoid perspective. It’s just normal light journalism. Context matters.

      • deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day 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.