Comment by doom2
3 days ago
edit: this comment made before two threads were consolidated. Original thread titled "Explosions reported in Venezuelan capital Caracas"
While I agree that "hypocrisy" isn't the right word here, I see where OP is coming from.
At least in American media, the use of passive voice (or as I've heard it called sometimes "exonerative voice") often obfuscates or otherwise provides cover for authorities. For example, "Tower collapses after missile strike" and "Man dies after being struck by bullet during arrest" are both technically true and yet also leave out important context (the country who fired the missile, the person who fired the gun and why).
Even if this headline is appropriate for now, it's not surprising that there should be questions over how it's worded.
It mainstream media, it's not about providing cover or obfuscating.
It's simply about not claiming causality where it hasn't been confirmed.
They teach you this stuff in journalism school. Once it gets confirmed, the new articles describe it causally, explaining the attribution.
The only goal here is accuracy. It's standard journalistic practice.
(I'm not talking about ideological publications.)