Update: 1. I have edited the above photo to make it less shocking. 2. I have also edited the caption to explain that the group in the photo is not the one alleged to have threatened FEMA personnel this past weekend in North Carolina. Rather, it was a...
Hurricane recovery officials in N.C. relocated amid report of ‘armed militia… out hunting FEMA.’
Ironically the photo is misinformation, or just clickbait. It depicts a group from Wyoming who was opposed to the reintroduction of wolves, not the people hunting FEMA. They grabbed a random scary looking picture and used it for their article.
I’m not sure if I agree about misinformation, but the photo is definitely clickbait. However, highlighting that it’s clickbait, and - as you’ve done - offering context about the real story of the photo (which I didn’t know) is, well, great. It identifies the issue without leaving it up to question as to what the issue is.
And that’s where you differ from the other commenter. They left things pretty darn vague, and I didn’t like the impression they seemed to be building toward - especially as their comment ended with a statement that I took to mean that they were justifying violence against FEMA workers, right after expressing doubt for the validity of the photo.
Which is well-placed doubt, but I mean - read the article, which explains things, don’t just assume and make ill-informed comments. When I make a mistake, I just shrug and go “Ah, crap, you’re right” rather than double down and go ‘Well, I’ll never read anything from the publisher anyway[, even though I’ll spend time and effort commenting on it]!’
What I took from their comments is that they’re alt-right and they’ve been told to hate FEMA, so they hate FEMA. There’s not really any reason to continue talking to someone who only has opinions they’re told to have, and dismisses any other information.
Ironically the photo is misinformation, or just clickbait. It depicts a group from Wyoming who was opposed to the reintroduction of wolves, not the people hunting FEMA. They grabbed a random scary looking picture and used it for their article.
I’m not sure if I agree about misinformation, but the photo is definitely clickbait. However, highlighting that it’s clickbait, and - as you’ve done - offering context about the real story of the photo (which I didn’t know) is, well, great. It identifies the issue without leaving it up to question as to what the issue is.
And that’s where you differ from the other commenter. They left things pretty darn vague, and I didn’t like the impression they seemed to be building toward - especially as their comment ended with a statement that I took to mean that they were justifying violence against FEMA workers, right after expressing doubt for the validity of the photo.
Which is well-placed doubt, but I mean - read the article, which explains things, don’t just assume and make ill-informed comments. When I make a mistake, I just shrug and go “Ah, crap, you’re right” rather than double down and go ‘Well, I’ll never read anything from the publisher anyway[, even though I’ll spend time and effort commenting on it]!’
What I took from their comments is that they’re alt-right and they’ve been told to hate FEMA, so they hate FEMA. There’s not really any reason to continue talking to someone who only has opinions they’re told to have, and dismisses any other information.