A headline is supposed to convey a simple straight forward summary of the article, without any question or confusion about the content.
This headline is anything but straight forward … it can mean multiple things to multiple different groups of people … and the writer and news agency can feign ignorance and call it all a misunderstanding if anyone reading it questions the headline.
A sign of a bad news agency or an unreliable source is when they produce headlines that beg more questions about the presentation, journalist, writer, or news agency than the actual article they shared.
Democrats voted on a resolution for an arms embargo, and the vote failed
This could mean the Democrats voted for the resolution, but it failed. It could also mean the Democrats voted against the resolution, making it fail. All we know is the Dems voted, and the vote failed. The statement isn’t clear which way they voted.
My first assumption was that it was only the Democrats voting, which seems to have been the case, as it was a DNC internal vote. If there were more than democrats voting on it, then to say that it was the democrats who were voting would seem to me to be unnecessary or misleading.
They certainly could have mentioned the DNC in the title to make it more more clear, though.
A headline is supposed to convey a simple straight forward summary of the article, without any question or confusion about the content.
This headline is anything but straight forward … it can mean multiple things to multiple different groups of people … and the writer and news agency can feign ignorance and call it all a misunderstanding if anyone reading it questions the headline.
A sign of a bad news agency or an unreliable source is when they produce headlines that beg more questions about the presentation, journalist, writer, or news agency than the actual article they shared.
I thought it was straightforward.
Democrats voted on a resolution for an arms embargo, and the vote failed.
Your explanation isn’t straightforward though.
This could mean the Democrats voted for the resolution, but it failed. It could also mean the Democrats voted against the resolution, making it fail. All we know is the Dems voted, and the vote failed. The statement isn’t clear which way they voted.
My first assumption was that it was only the Democrats voting, which seems to have been the case, as it was a DNC internal vote. If there were more than democrats voting on it, then to say that it was the democrats who were voting would seem to me to be unnecessary or misleading.
They certainly could have mentioned the DNC in the title to make it more more clear, though.
That’s actually less straightforward
Yeah I still don’t understand the people having a problem with this?
The comma does the heavy lifting and is unfotunately ambiguous.
This could easily mean:
Democrats vote down resolution that is calling for arms embargo on Israel and recognizing Palestinian state
Democrats vote down resolution that is calling for arms embargo on Israel while recognizing Palestinian state
In the case the resolution is unnamed in the headline:
Democrats vote down resolution thus calling for arms embargo on Israel and recognizing Palestinian state
Democrats vote down resolution thus calling for arms embargo on Israel, recognizing Palestinian state in the process
What things? How are you reading it that’s what I’m not understanding either. You say it can convey multiple things but I’m not seeing it.
I replied to someone else with this but I’ll post it here as well.
The comma does the heavy lifting and is unfotunately ambiguous.
This could easily mean:
Democrats vote down resolution that is calling for arms embargo on Israel and recognizing Palestinian state
Democrats vote down resolution that is calling for arms embargo on Israel while recognizing Palestinian state
In the case the resolution is unnamed in the headline:
Democrats vote down resolution thus calling for arms embargo on Israel and recognizing Palestinian state
Democrats vote down resolution thus calling for arms embargo on Israel, recognizing Palestinian state in the process