Fox posted this very misleading graphic comparing people on welfare to people with full-time jobs to conclude that there are more people on welfare than with jobs—by the looks of this chart, 5 times as many people on welfare than there are working.
Let’s break down everything that is wrong with this.
- The chart uses a shortened y-axis to make the number of people on welfare look 5 times as large as the number of people with jobs. 108.6 is not five times bigger than 101.7.
- The figure for the “people on welfare” includes anyone in a household where one member participated in a means-tested program. The figure for people with a full-time job is only individuals who worked.
- Many people who receive federal benefits also work—6.4 million households where someone works also receive food stamps, for example.
Fox has a history of misleading graphics, but this one really exposes their smear campaign against government programs. Charts this bad don’t happen by accident.
This made me laugh a bit too hard.
We’re staunchly anti-parody accounts here at VICE Mag Tumblr, but we’ll make an exception for this one, because it’s about us. Some of @vice_is_hip's tweets are too silly (and its handle is dumb), but there's some solid headlines there too. They'll probably all end up as real articles.
A debate cropped up in the newsroom today.
When referring to human beings in a social context, is it more proper to use the nouns female/male or women/men?
The example “As the only male/female in the group” versus “As the only man/woman in the group”
Our stylebooks didn’t present a preference. What do you all think?
The AP announced that organizations that use their stylebooks shall refer to the soldier formerly known as Bradley Manning as Chelsea E. Manning and use female pronouns per her wishes.
The Internet responded in a disgusting fashion.
(Obviously Ann Marie Awad is the exception)