U.S. to fast track $29 million to help Charleston shooting victims' families

[Axulus]

Looks like the story originated from a tweet from Kevin Lewis, the Justice Dept. press secretary:

@TheJusticeDept expedites $29 M victim assist grants to SC. Funds can be used to help victims of #CharlestonShooting tragedy at Emanuel AME

https://twitter.com/klewis44

The headline seems to be similar to the tweet itself.

 

[ronburgundy]

Looks like the story originated from a tweet from Kevin Lewis, the Justice Dept. press secretary:

@TheJusticeDept expedites $29 M victim assist grants to SC. Funds can be used to help victims of #CharlestonShooting tragedy at Emanuel AME

https://twitter.com/klewis44

The headline seems to be similar to the tweet itself.

No, the headline is a total misrepresentation of the tweet, which itself is not misleading and explicitly states that the $29 mil is for a grant to SC and not a direct payment for Charleston victims as the headline implies.

 

[Axulus]

Looks like the story originated from a tweet from Kevin Lewis, the Justice Dept. press secretary:



https://twitter.com/klewis44

The headline seems to be similar to the tweet itself.

No, the headline is a total misrepresentation of the tweet, which itself is not misleading and explicitly states that the $29 mil is for a grant to SC and not a direct payment for Charleston victims as the headline implies.

The headline writer didn't read the tweet very carefully.

 

[ronburgundy]

No, the headline is a total misrepresentation of the tweet, which itself is not misleading and explicitly states that the $29 mil is for a grant to SC and not a direct payment for Charleston victims as the headline implies.

The headline writer didn't read the tweet very carefully.

That's too generous. More likely, the profit-seeking headline writer (maybe in collaboration with their editor) deliberately tried to use phrasing that would lead to exactly the kind of wrong conclusion and emotional response to it that started this thread.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The article title was poorly written. The article itself appears to have been poorly read.

No shit captain obvious. I'm sure you're perfect in every little way.

Well, if you just read what you quoted in the OP, maybe you wouldn't have had any issues with this complete non-issue.