LogFAQs > #966730449

Far-Queue posted...

It's strange. A 15 year-old is a child. Full stop. Nothing misleading there.

I'd say most people think of younger children than 15 when they hear the word "child" without other context. Even the article itself specifies "teen," which narrows it down to give a more accurate first impression. It's not wrong, but it does imply something other than the reality of the situation at first glance, which is exactly what "misleading" means.

Far-Queue posted...

Whether this child is innocent is irrelevant. Cops killed him. Nothing misleading there.

Similarly, without further context, "child killed in botched raid" is going to make most people think of an innocent bystander, not an active participant in the standoff. Again, that's misleading. That does not even remotely justify cops killing him, given that neither the cops nor anyone else were in any danger from him and they were extremely negligent in their approach, but that doesn't mean you didn't phrase it in a misleading way. "Title is a little misleading" is a perfectly accurate statement: you're not doing anything that's likely to change the ultimate conclusions people draw (which would be really misleading), but you are stating some of the facts in ways don't necessarily reflect the situation (a little misleading).

"Can't give the majority of fault to the police," however, is not. They could have done many things to prevent this outcome that they chose not to do. Everything about this kid's death is their fault, even though I expect none of them will face any justice for it because police are only ever held accountable if the entire country protests so hard that it grinds to a halt.