Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Dcap16 t1_jdvh9oz wrote

Reply to comment by persolb in All 7 Pennsylvania chocolate factory explosion victims found by Substantial-Pass-992

Victim is appropriate. The use of bodies is so disrespectful to families imo. Someone’s son or daughter shouldn’t in the end be simply referred to as “body”. They’re a victim alive or dead.

140

persolb t1_jdvx037 wrote

Adding the word ‘dead’ after ‘found’ would work too. Or switch ‘victims’ to ‘killed’.

The important information is that they are not alive anymore.

95

graveybrains t1_je164ud wrote

The expectation that whole articles can be crammed down into the space of a headline is getting out of hand.

2

persolb t1_je1wwou wrote

If the whole update can be a headline it should be. The entire rest of that article is filler.

Just to prove the point, I asked ChatGPT to summarize the headline in three ways and got:

Seven dead in Pennsylvania chocolate factory explosion

Seven fatalities confirmed in Pennsylvania chocolate factory explosion

West Reading community mourns loss of seven lives in chocolate factory explosion

​

Someone paid to do it should be able to come up with a better headline. I also, after some persuasion, got it to provide click-bait versions...

"You won't believe what caused the deadly explosion at this chocolate factory!"

"Exclusive: Eyewitness reveals shocking details about the chocolate factory blast in Pennsylvania"

"Is the chocolate industry hiding something? Tragic explosion at factory raises questions"

0

Sinder77 t1_jdw3cmk wrote

Is it? Seems like the information being passed along was that those people were missing after the explosion, now they've been found.

−31

VanillaLifestyle t1_jdw46ic wrote

All the dead are victims but not all the victims are dead.

38

Sinder77 t1_jdw4di7 wrote

OK, but the headline is talking about whether or not they're been found.

−19

NordicDong t1_jdw5fad wrote

Found alive or recovered a body is a huge difference. You don't understand why people would want to know how many died vs stubbed their toe?

26

Sinder77 t1_jdw5mjo wrote

The article gives that detail. This is a headline.

It's literally the first line of the article that they're bodies were found.

−19

NordicDong t1_jdw5qk6 wrote

Why not include that in the headline? It's intentionally misleading so you have to click. There will 100% be people who just read the headline and now believe 7 people just got found alive.

12

Sinder77 t1_jdw64pl wrote

Because the point of this article is that they have now found all of them.

Before, they were missing. Now, they are found. The news is that they have now been found.

−5

NordicDong t1_jdwaqj0 wrote

Found means NOTHING without knowing if they're alive or not. You're either dense or pointlessly argumentative

6

Sinder77 t1_jdwfvvm wrote

It's just the headline dude.

Like the alternative run would be that they're still missing. Which is also news. It's an ongoing situation that was updated. The update was that they're no longer looking for anyone as they've all been accounted for. I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall.

0

NordicDong t1_jdwgm0a wrote

The real update is that they're DEAD not just found bruh. Nobody cares that they were found. The status is what matters. Get it together smh

5

Slapbox t1_jdwfhht wrote

Using "recovered" instead of "found" is the way to handle this, I think.

89

Dcap16 t1_jdwj5vh wrote

I agree. But, it’s just a headline. It’s become too normal to use body. Body this body that for one or two paragraph articles that serve no other purpose than to generate revenue from the dozen advertisements on the page. Last week locally “body pulled from pond” when the first paragraph gives the man’s name, age, circumstances (accident). Why not “56yo local man recovered from pond following accident”? It is just something that grinds my gears.

12

Brohara97 t1_jdxxjm0 wrote

Never thought about that before but you’re right! I think that may grind my gears now too!

7

richalex2010 t1_jdxgj5l wrote

There's other terms. "Remains of all 7 Pennsylvania chocolate factory victims found" would more accurately describe the victims' deceased condition without being disrespectful.

18

Dcap16 t1_jdxlw2d wrote

Many other options than body. But it is just a headline.

1

Exseatsniffer t1_jdvo3g3 wrote

You might be right, but it's not accurate. And I don't think the family would be more distraught by reading about bodies as they're pretty much at peak fucked up as it is and I'm pretty sure this article is the least of their problems right now. Journalism should be about accuracy, not about potential hurt feelings.

10

axxl75 t1_jdvrf0k wrote

Victims is accurate just not as specific as it could be. And if you bothered to open the article literally the 3rd word is “bodies”.

You’re getting pedantic and upset over nothing.

8

Dcap16 t1_jdw0dti wrote

It’s completely accurate. Want the full story? Read the article, not just headlines. Bodies is used to generate clicks.

−1

Orleanian t1_jdxadi9 wrote

I mean... wouldn't this headline lead me to believe that I should call MarySue up and congratulate her on her son having been found?

Which would be inappropriate, as it was his dead body that was found, and my condolences that should have been offered?

9

biscovery t1_jdw4go7 wrote

Its implied that they were dead but i wasn’t sure til i read the comments. Probably could have just read the article but that’s a lot of work.

2