Edit 1: Does no one read in Lemmy? Lol.
I got downvoted for posting a fact check about this myth from a reputable source.
Edit 1: Does no one read in Lemmy? Lol.
I got downvoted for posting a fact check about this myth from a reputable source.
Because no one thinks she did…
If you posted:
Is Harris an energy vampire trying to take over the world for the Golden Retriever lobby?
People wouldn’t care if the link says she’s not, everyone knows shes not and they’re just downvoting a clickbait headline.
I firmly support the golden retrievers, as long as they keep out the doodles.
What about Golden-doodles? (Or like my dog, a mutt-doodle)
Mutts rule! I’m not all in on the ‘get a breeder dog and mix it with a breeder doodle to make a breeder something doodle’.
Edit 1: Does no one read in Lemmy? Lol.
No, we do not.
Things that might help, outright say in your text field “No.” Personally, I don’t like the article title that gives the conspiracy theory any more visibility.Right. Save me the click.
I’m just guessing, but I bet the downvotes have more to do with the clickbait headline. It should read: Harris Did Not Wear Earbuds or whatever.
Better headline would be “Debunking false Harris cheating conspiracies”, but if they did that no one would bother reading it. The conspiracy believers will ignore everything that goes against their conspiracy (including ironically this article even if they read it), and everyone else will ignore it because of course she didn’t “cheat”. It’s pure clickbait.
It’s a stupid headline and has already been debunked. The ONLY reason to post this - especially as a question - is to keep the question ‘alive’ for a little while longer. That is why you’re getting down-voted.
Hi. Let me explain my downvote to you, 101.
When you post an article, you get a screen that looks like this:
In that form, you can submit the title as is, or add more context, in the Title field. For instance, you could have given the full title, including the subtitle:
This would have made your post clearer.
Alternatively, in the Body field, you could have included a few lines from the article.
The claim was shared on Russian state-run media Sputnik’s Chinese-language Weibo on Sept. 11, 2024.
“Harris wore the Nova H1 Audio earrings during last night’s debate with Trump,” the claim reads in part. Sputnik cited “American musician Jonnie King” to back its claim.
-and-
A photo comparison between the earrings worn by Harris during the debate and the Nova H1 shows they differ in shape. In particular, the metal portions of both earrings show a major difference.
-and-
Under the debate rules issued by ABC it is forbidden to use props or pre-written notes.
However, ABC did provide pen and paper for each candidate’s use during the debate.
…would have made great fodder for the body of your post.
Either way, and I suspect you would have gotten better reader engagement. Let’s not reward bad journalism and
bullshitconspiracy theory factories, please.Edit: A word.
No.
No she did not.
The real scoop is that Trump himself wore a bluetooth communication device throughout the debate - the tell tale signs of subtle vibrations have been confirmed by independent experts - I’ve seen talk of this before on Lemmy but it seems like MSM have been suppressing this story… yet another case of conservative bias.
It’s been credibly pointed out elsewhere that Trump pulled a Hans Neimann
It’s well known that Donald Trump was using a bluetooth butt plug during the debate […]
So projection…
Removed by mod
One of us reads, the other doesn’t.
One of us have a attention span that is barely enough to write a comment, the other have a normal one.
I am pretty average, but I use my brain to discuss facts.
You use your brain to insult me out of no where, which show me how low is your intelligence level.
Enjoy.
The truth goes in the headline.
This headline calls the truth into question, which is the wrong answer.
Clicking to read the article is not for dispelling lies, it’s for additional details about the truth you learned in the headline.
People here live in a separate world than reality.
Did you check any social media posts/ comments in the last week?
They are literally filled with people saying that harris was cheating during the debate.
What this article is doing is inviting those people to disapprove their wrong theories.
This article is just a debunking for this conspiracy theory.
One of us lacks rational thought and believes it’s plausible that bluetooth earrings were used to provide answers or coach a presidential candidate during a debate because they otherwise would be totally incapable of intelligent thought all on their own.
Didn’t I tell you before, one of us doesn’t read.
Right. Sorry!
Edit: Whoooosh
No problem brother.
I forgive you for your mistake.
Radio Free Asia - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Radio Free Asia:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.rfa.org/english/news/afcl/afcl-harris-earrings-09182024053204.html
