Here’s the headline on cnn.com “Teen involved in stabbing of Barnard student Tessa Majors sentenced to 18 months in custody”.
Only in the body of the story is it noted that Majors was murdered, not merely stabbed.
The irony is that further down in the story it is noted that Legal Aid avoided using the term “murder”.
Fuck you CNN headline writer.
? News headlines refer to murders as “stabbing” or “shooting” or “strangling”, etc., all the time. It’s short for “fatal stabbing” or the like.
I think the murder of Tessa Majors is a horrific crime, but I’m not going to get mad at a headline writer for referring to it as a “stabbing”, because that’s what it was. A fatal stabbing.
Here are some more headlines about murders that mention the type of fatal attack but not the word “murder”:
Stabbing Victim, Suspect Dead in Second Officer-Involved Shooting of the Weekend
Former O.C. attorney convicted of strangling ex-wife, throwing her off cruise ship
dupey dupe
Are you saying that it wasn’t a stabbing?
Good thing that every time someone is murdered with a gun, the headline specifically uses the term MURDER in the headline about the shooting.
Oh wait. They don’t.
Never mind.
This OP is stupid. I mean, embarrassingly stupid. We’re talking levels of stupidity that I normally reserved for posters that are now banned due to how stupid they were.
Hunh, if I were going to take issue with anything in the headline, it would probably be the phrase “involved in stabbing”. Did he stab her or not? The sentence of 18 months suggests maybe he wasn’t the actual stabber, but who knows from the little info available?
No, he wasn’t the stabber. He handed the knife over to the stabber.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/us/tessa-majors-teen-sentencing/index.html
This isn’t a pitting; it’s more of a scuffing.
Fuck you OP writer.
Not all homicide, even legally prohibited homicide, is murder. While the two other suspects in that case still face murder charges, there has yet to be a trial weighing the evidence against the elements of a crime of murder.
Legal Aid, representing a client who was convicted only of first degree robbery not any kind of homicide, absolutely should not be using murder in their statements. It is literally their job in defending their client.
CNN, to be factually accurate, should also not use murder to describe the fatal stabbing at this time. Murder has yet to be proven in court. Fatal stabbing would be more accurate but it is already a lengthy headline. As Kimstu points out that omission is relatively common. They also do not exactly try to hide the fatal piece in this story that I think you are referencing. The story starts “A teenager involved in the fatal stabbing of Barnard student Tessa Majors…” They also reported on the statement of the family which took the tact of the OP and used the label murder.
Kudos to both CNN and Legal Aid for maintaining high professional standards in the face of a horrible crime. My heart can still grieve for the family while also respecting journalists and defense attorneys that do difficult jobs well.
No link. Pit fail.
I’m unclear on the fuss over the CNN headline. Is it the fact that “death” wasn’t implicit in the statement or what appears to be an inordinately light sentence?
Unless a large inheritance is involved, it is improper to label it a “murder.”
Agatha Christie 101.
I’d give it about a 70% chance that the OP thinks that CNN is soft-pedaling this because the attackers are (likely) black (one of them was named Rashaun or something) and because Tessa is white.
So, your cites to the contrary (showing other headlines that do the same thing, explaining that “murder” hasn’t actually be found yet by a court), will fall on deaf ears.
Okay, I’m apparently going against the crowd on this one. I agree with the OP. I think the headline is somewhat deceptive. When I read “John Doe was stabbed” my default assumption is that it was a non-lethal assault. If the stabbing resulted in his death, then I feel “John Doe was murdered” is more accurate.
Then, you get sued for libel by the other defendants, since I don’t think there has been a murder conviction yet. So, you’d have to say “John Doe was allegedly murdered.”
“Teen involved with alleged murder by stabbing of Barnard student Tessa Majors sentenced to 18 months in custody” – becomes a little unwieldy. The stabbing part is important, because the article is about the kid who handed over the knife.
What if it was self-defense? Then “was stabbed” is accurate but “was murdered” isn’t, even though both might have ended up in death.
Agree with RitterSport.
ETA: about the reason for the OP. My 1st thought too.
Clearly, the OP is deeply concerned about journalistic standards.
Okay, this wasn’t an across the page HEADLINE, it was in the third column. And if you’re interested in Tiny Tessa’s murder, which happened a long time ago, the two older boys and stabbers are in custody and will be tried as adults.
I agree, the default assumption is that a ‘stabbing victim’ survived because such a large majority do. Even with guns it’s common to cite figures for ‘shootings’ which include the majority who are only wounded, or sometimes only the wounded.
Also not getting the angle of libel if the headline reports a person’s sentencing. ‘teen convicted in the stabbing death of…’ ‘involved in’ only if they weren’t the person who actually did the stabbing.
I have no idea if there’s a conscious or subconscious political agenda but CNN is now reasonably considered a politicized source and I don’t think benefits by making itself look more so by sloppy headline writing. Which is maybe all it is.