Huh? It was a lie. You want confirmation that a lie is a lie? How does one prove that? You literally got this backwards—the onus would be on you to prove that there was pro-trans messaging on the bullet.
I would argue that news organizations that report about something that could incite more violence without knowing any details is not legitimate.
Edit: Downvote me all you want, but reporting on something that immediately sounded made up without asking any more questions or knowing any details is journalistic malpractice.
But obviously their affirmation is as credible as the tweet. Surprise, surprise, narratives are trying to get the upper spin. The tribes continue. Nothing is learned; nothing is gained. It goes on…
Would like more confirmation on this than a picture of a tweet saying so.
Huh? It was a lie. You want confirmation that a lie is a lie? How does one prove that? You literally got this backwards—the onus would be on you to prove that there was pro-trans messaging on the bullet.
Also, fucking google it.
Settle down, Francis. I don’t believe something just because someone posted a picture of someone else’s tweet saying it. That’s how propaganda works.
This is someone making a claim, secondhand. People who make claims have the burden of proof. I am not making a claim.
e: https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/20824428
And the claim isn’t true. That wasn’t a retraction.
Now apply that same logic to the original claim
I fucking did.
https://fedia.io/m/news@lemmy.world/t/2696480/-/comment/12284533
Did you?
The thread parent posted, as a quote from somewhere:
A responder replied:
Because that claim was not in the article posted.
I replied, what you’re linking to:
That it was being reported. At legitimate sources. Which it was. Being reported.
I would argue that news organizations that report about something that could incite more violence without knowing any details is not legitimate.
Edit: Downvote me all you want, but reporting on something that immediately sounded made up without asking any more questions or knowing any details is journalistic malpractice.
You realize a 34-counts-of-fraud, demented rapist is in the White House with this corporate news system doing what it does right?
Malpractice? We are so far away from what they’re doing being called journalism now we can’t talk about malpractice for a long time.
I downvoted you because you’re making it out like I was being disingenuous, which I clearly was not.
Someone just posted proof they didn’t retract it.
Its very much still up, now just framed in a “maybe do your own research before believing us” kinda way lmao
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/charlie-kirk-shot/card/ammunition-in-kirk-shooting-engraved-with-transgender-antifascist-ideology-sources-pdymd1sXXMSlVRhpvR4b
Thank you! That’s hardly a retraction, innit?
It’s not.
But obviously their affirmation is as credible as the tweet. Surprise, surprise, narratives are trying to get the upper spin. The tribes continue. Nothing is learned; nothing is gained. It goes on…