Well, ye, I had a search for some articles too. But with how unreliable us news channels have been recently, I figured to check it for myself. Anyways, bad news confirmed, unfortunately
yeah, nothing wrong with that - but it’s also good to know what the specific claim is to know what to look for - the claim is that they removed resources and materials that related to trans and LGBT+ youth, not that they removed listed missing kids who were trans like the headline could lead someone to believe.
The article also includes a hyperlink on each piece of reported data, in text. It’s good to be skeptical, but you should try not to be outright distrustful. Learning what a good article looks like is just as important as learning how to spot a bad one
Well, ye, I had a search for some articles too. But with how unreliable us news channels have been recently, I figured to check it for myself. Anyways, bad news confirmed, unfortunately
yeah, nothing wrong with that - but it’s also good to know what the specific claim is to know what to look for - the claim is that they removed resources and materials that related to trans and LGBT+ youth, not that they removed listed missing kids who were trans like the headline could lead someone to believe.
The article also includes a hyperlink on each piece of reported data, in text. It’s good to be skeptical, but you should try not to be outright distrustful. Learning what a good article looks like is just as important as learning how to spot a bad one
Unfortunately there’s more than just the look of any article. The journalist can have the best of intentions but just be wrong