(@Deimos, if you're looking for outrage-oriented news, here's an example right here.) I am absolutely outraged that this behaviour is happening - and not in one of those supposed hellholes where...
(@Deimos, if you're looking for outrage-oriented news, here's an example right here.)
I am absolutely outraged that this behaviour is happening - and not in one of those supposed hellholes where human rights are routinely abused, but in an allegedly civilised country.
Not only are they torturing people, but they're torturing disabled people - and some of them are children! Why is this place not just closed down? Authorities should walk in and remove all the patientsvictims immediately.
I'm not sure how to try to get the distinction across—there's a major difference between something that's individually significant but causes outrage compared to something that's insignificant if...
I'm not sure how to try to get the distinction across—there's a major difference between something that's individually significant but causes outrage compared to something that's insignificant if not for the outrage factor. The latter is what I mean by "outrage-oriented".
An article with "torture" in the title, and which refers to "child abuse" in the lede isn't looking to cause outrage? :P It might be justified outrage, but it's outrage all the same. My point is...
An article with "torture" in the title, and which refers to "child abuse" in the lede isn't looking to cause outrage? :P It might be justified outrage, but it's outrage all the same.
My point is that lots of things cause outrage, and it's extremely difficult to come up with a dividing line that says "this is outrageous but acceptable, while that is outrageous but not acceptable".
The line between outrageous by nature and outrageous by design (demonstrating low integrity) regardless of "good intentions" is reasonably clear. A pattern of posting the latter or...
The line between outrageous by nature and outrageous by design (demonstrating low integrity) regardless of "good intentions" is reasonably clear.
A pattern of posting the latter or misunderstanding the distinction is concerning.
Especially since your characterization of this as outrage-oriented blurs the line because it is a unique example, being somewhere in the middle of engaging and clickbait.
(@Deimos, if you're looking for outrage-oriented news, here's an example right here.)
I am absolutely outraged that this behaviour is happening - and not in one of those supposed hellholes where human rights are routinely abused, but in an allegedly civilised country.
Not only are they torturing people, but they're torturing disabled people - and some of them are children! Why is this place not just closed down? Authorities should walk in and remove all the
patientsvictims immediately.This is absolutely disgusting.
I'm not sure how to try to get the distinction across—there's a major difference between something that's individually significant but causes outrage compared to something that's insignificant if not for the outrage factor. The latter is what I mean by "outrage-oriented".
An article with "torture" in the title, and which refers to "child abuse" in the lede isn't looking to cause outrage? :P It might be justified outrage, but it's outrage all the same.
My point is that lots of things cause outrage, and it's extremely difficult to come up with a dividing line that says "this is outrageous but acceptable, while that is outrageous but not acceptable".
The line between outrageous by nature and outrageous by design (demonstrating low integrity) regardless of "good intentions" is reasonably clear.
A pattern of posting the latter or misunderstanding the distinction is concerning.
Especially since your characterization of this as outrage-oriented blurs the line because it is a unique example, being somewhere in the middle of engaging and clickbait.
Suddenly the phrase "Your agonizer, please." is running through my head.