The Chinese leader's message in San Francisco got the attention of U.S. officials because it was delivered at a meeting that was intended to reduce tensions.
The news media needs to report what is true and verifiable, without adding their own interpretation (except for labelled opinion pieces).
In this case, the true and verifiable fact to report is what Xi told Biden. And without checking primary sources, I’m sure he used a word meaning “reunify”.
Iit should always be apparent there is editorialization happening tho. Kinda like [sic] -> that is obviously the author clarifying they are not misquoting or misspelling
But it’s a good yardstick to measure the news you’re reading. Always ask yourself:
“Are they reporting on something that happened? If yes, do they say who’s seen it happen?”
Way too many “news stories” nowadays boil down to “some no-one posted something on X about something they haven’t themselves witnessed”.
The news media needs to report what is true and verifiable, without adding their own interpretation (except for labelled opinion pieces).
In this case, the true and verifiable fact to report is what Xi told Biden. And without checking primary sources, I’m sure he used a word meaning “reunify”.
If they’re using a false term but quoting someone they should use quotes:
Iit should always be apparent there is editorialization happening tho. Kinda like [sic] -> that is obviously the author clarifying they are not misquoting or misspelling
if they did that there wouldnt be much news, a lot fewer journalists, less jobs overall, and much less advertising revenue.
never gonna happen
But it’s a good yardstick to measure the news you’re reading. Always ask yourself:
“Are they reporting on something that happened? If yes, do they say who’s seen it happen?”
Way too many “news stories” nowadays boil down to “some no-one posted something on X about something they haven’t themselves witnessed”.