Why the difference?
Posted March 28, 2014on:
I expected that STonline would lead with a headline like Video games linked to aggressive behaviour in kids says Singapore study.
But I found it interesting that when tweeted it read:
An editor might argue that there is only so much space for a headline. But the tweet was so much more informative.
The non-paywall and longer article is at Reuters and it is titled Violent video games may be tied to aggressive thoughts.
STonline cites the findings as aggressive behaviour while Reuters choose aggressive thoughts. STonline leaves much of the critique of the study out while Reuters leaves more of it intact.
So why the difference? If you do not read widely or critically, what conclusions are you likely to draw?