Every time I see a question in a news headline, I just answer it with “no.” in my head and move on. 90% of the time it’s the same answer the article arrives at and the other 10% of the time, I’ll see a real headline about it from other sources anyway–with the actual lede in the title.
Sure, but why not just lead with a negative assertion instead of implying that there’s an open question? The question implies that there is controversy, even when none exists.
Fact Checking RFK Jr’s False Claims About Fluoride
Every time I see a question in a news headline, I just answer it with “no.” in my head and move on. 90% of the time it’s the same answer the article arrives at and the other 10% of the time, I’ll see a real headline about it from other sources anyway–with the actual lede in the title.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
Awesome, I didn’t know this
It might be beneficial for some to understand the “what” and “why” behind the “no,” no?
Sure, but why not just lead with a negative assertion instead of implying that there’s an open question? The question implies that there is controversy, even when none exists.
Would be a perfectly acceptable headline.