Trying not to sound as sensationalist as the original story, but this part specifically had me infuriated:
"Hunter has had less luck. Of the news stories, he said: “They’re infuriating but they’re comical if you have the facts… I tried to give the facts to KIRO, I tried to give the facts to Daily Mail, I tried to give the facts to Business Insider. I would send them actual proof of everything, and none of that mattered. They just wanted that [online] engagement.”
How do we solve that problem? Educate people to instead read properly informed news sources that still have journalistic integrity? Hold the journalists to a higher standard and call them out when printing sensationalist stories? Even if they are called out, the damage is usually already done. The press is supposed to check society, but who checks the press?
Unsurprising, but it did it's job of energizing and outraging the right. Seattle City council was just swept by them, too.
My house got taken over by a series of unauthorized residents. Sheriff's officers did nothing..
[flagged]
[flagged]
A reminder that anytime an outlandish or shocking sounding claim is made, to follow up on its veracity. Usually it is much less surprising. For example: that lady that sued McDonald’s for coffee being hot… sued because the coffee was hot enough to melt flesh, which she experienced firsthand. And don’t take my word for it because that, too, is shocking. 0.
0 - https://www.tortmuseum.org/liebeck-v-mcdonalds/