World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
There's a video of it hitting.
There's photos of the damage
There's photos of the drone remnants
So why does the headline characterise it as hearsay?
The story also goes on to say about how the deaths caused by the soviet-era disaster cause is disputed. How is that a pertinent thing to add?
The BBC, for all it's issues, still follows basic rules of journalistic integrity with regards to facts.
If the BBC can't independently verify something through their own trusted channels (and multiple at that), they won't state something as fact, they'll just state the claim and say who made the claim.
It's not disrespectful, or suggesting that party is lying, it's just how good journalism is carried out.
As for why discussing how deadly the effects of the disaster have been, I imagine that's because people reading the article are concerned about the potential deadly effects of damage to the current radiation shield, and so some background is useful here.
Again, the BBC can't truly verify how many died, we only have our own nation's educated guesses coupled with the likely intentionally inaccurate numbers released by the USSR, and it's difficult to pin exact causes on some long term effects on an individual basis, like an increased cancer rate.
I would be surprised if these numbers weren't disputed, and so as it's relevant to bring up the deadly effects of the disaster, the responsible thing to do is to also mention that the actual number of casualties is disputed.
Good journalism isn't telling us what to think, feel or believe, good journalism is attempting to give us the unvarnished facts, claims, or what information we do have, which are pertinent to understanding the situation ourselves.
Like how they covered the white Swedish guy shooting up a school by putting a headline photo of a middle eastern immigrant.
It's the Russia part that they can't verify, as Russia deny doing it
So make the headline "Chernobyl hit by suspected Russian drone" and make that clear.
They probably a/b tested some headlines and this one got the most clicks.
It's not disputed those are just different parts of the same IAEA report. 2 people died in the explosion, 28 of radiation poisoning, 1 from a heart attack, so 31 known, then 19 with high radiation exposure died years later for ambiguous reasons, so 50 potential direct accident deaths. And then they estimated about 4,000 as the total eventual cancer deaths.
You already know why.