Guest Post: Why is sarcasm so difficult to detect in texts and emails?

Sara Peters, Newberry College

This sentence begins the best article you will ever read.

Chances are you thought that last statement might be sarcasm. Sarcasm, as linguist Robert Gibbs noted, includes “words used to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning of a sentence.” A form of irony, it also tends to be directed toward a specific individual.

However, it’s not always easy to figure out if a writer is being sarcastic – particularly as we march ahead in a digital age that has transformed the way we communicate, with texting, emailing and online commentary replacing face-to-face chats or phone conversations.

In writing, the signal of sarcasm can be muddied. For example, say you’re texting with a friend about meeting at the movies:

Friend: I’m waiting at the front. Movie starts in 5.

You: I’m on my way now. Should be there in 10.

Friend: I’m glad you were watching the clock today.

Was the friend being sarcastic or sincere? The later you are, the more upset they’ll likely be, and the higher the probability their response is a sarcastic jab. But if your friend knows you’re usually much later, they could be sincere.

So there’s one thing to look for: How well does the attitude the writer is conveying agree with the situation and the person?

Nonetheless, the struggle to interpret written sarcasm is real.

Studies have shown that people realize that they have a tough time interpreting sarcasm in writing. Studying the use of email, researchers found writers who think they’re being obviously sarcastic still confuse readers.

Sarcasm thrives in ambiguous situations – and that’s the main issue.

When delivered in person, sarcasm tends to assume a cutting, bitter tone. But written messages don’t always get that attitude across or give you much else to go on. We still need more information.

Signals that go missing in texts

Studies have examined the use of sarcasm in a variety of everyday situations, whether it’s at work to give criticism or praise, or in situations where social norms get violated. (Be on time to movies, people!)

The problem is that a lot of previous studies of sarcasm have been done on spoken sarcasm, which tends to give listeners cues.

When you have a conversation with someone face-to-face (or FaceTime-to-FaceTime) and they say something sarcastic, you’ll see their facial expression, and they may look slightly bemused or tense. Equally or more helpful, the tone of their voice will likely change, too – they may sound more intense or draw out certain phrases.

You’ll also be firmly grounded in the real-time context of the situation, so when they say, “Man, nice job ironing your clothes,” you can look down – and see your wrinkled shirt.

All of these cues have been researched, and we know enough about them that we have the ability to artificially make a sincerely spoken statement sound sarcastic.

And yet when we text, a lot of that information goes missing.

There are no facial cues, no vocal tones and maybe even a delayed response if a person can’t text you back immediately. And if you don’t know the person all that well, there goes your last potential cue: history.

Emojis to the rescue?

So after what you thought was an unexceptional first date – exactly how do you interpret the following flurry of texts?

Date: I had a great time. (12:03 a.m.)

Date: That was the most fun I’ve had in years. (12:05 a.m.)

Date: Really, it could not have gone better. (12:30 a.m.)

Was the date really that good? Did they really seem like they had that much fun? Or are they just a jerk lamenting the wasted time? All valid questions. And the recipient could come to a lot of conclusions.

Fear not. The digital age has developed some ways to mitigate some of the tortuous ambiguity. You can probably include an emoji to make it clearer to a reader something was meant sarcastically.

Date: I had a great time. (12:03 a.m.)

Date: That was the most fun I’ve had in years. 😂 (12:05 a.m.)

Date: It really, could not have gone better. 😑 (12:30 a.m.)

Ambiguity reduced, and facial expression taken care of. Probably not headed for date #2.

If we’re talking about email, we also have modifications that that can be made to text. We can italicize or bold words to change the way that a reader interprets the message.

‘Oh great – salad with no dressing. My favorite!’
Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

Lastly, social media platforms like Twitter have given writers even more tools to allow people to communicate their intent. A study that included sarcastic tweets found that tweeters who include the hashtag #sarcasm tend to use more interjections (wow!) and positive wording for negative situations in their sarcastic tweets.

Algorithms have actually been built to determine the presence of sarcasm and rudeness in tweets, user reviews and online conversations. The formulas were able to identify language that’s outright rude pretty easily. But in order to correctly detect sarcasm, researchers found that algorithms need both linguistic (language) and semantic (meaning) information built in.

In other words, sarcasm’s subtlety means that the algorithms require more specification in their coding – unless you #sarcasm, of course.

With so many options to choose from, it’s time to make sure that text you send at 2:30 a.m. really gets your point across 😉.

Sara Peters, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Newberry College

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Guest Post: There's something queer about Tumblr

Paul Byron, Macquarie University and Brady Robards, Monash University

Tumblr is a site that can leave many adults confused. But for more than 330 million users worldwide it is a visual medium for self-expression where anything from politics to fan groups goes.

What makes Tumblr special is the mix of content you will find there. Think of it as the long-form, image-centric version of Twitter – but more personal. A blog can feature sentences that describe a user’s day, and this could be scattered among photo sets of refugees being rescued at sea, cat gifs, pornography, or complex paragraphs that analyse Donald Trump’s presidency. Above all, Tumblr characterises itself as a space of creative freedom.

More young people are turning online for peer support networks.
shutterstock

Like most other social media platforms, it is also ripe with peer networking, community building, and opportunities to explore gender and sexual identities. And despite the panic that often surrounds the perceived effects of social media on young people – such as fears about Facebook and privacy, Snapchat and sexting, and Instagram and narcissism – Tumblr is often left out of the debate.

Perhaps that’s because it mostly appeals to a niche audience, and can be seen as the “weird” cousin of these major platforms. This makes it a perfect venue for queer and questioning youth to hang out.

It’s a queer world

In 2016, we organised a research project called Scrolling Beyond Binaries to explore the ways young people of diverse genders and sexualities use social media. We looked particularly at how young lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer, and asexual (LGBTIQA+) people use the network. To do so, we surveyed over 1,300 people aged 16-35 who identified in these ways.

Compared to broader surveys of young people’s social media use, we found young LGBTIQA+ people are using Tumblr much more frequently.

Queer and gender diverse youth in Australia are using Tumblr more than their straight and cisgender peers.

There are some issues in comparing these studies – the number of people surveyed, where they lived, and their ages – but that 64% of our respondents used Tumblr is noteworthy.

So why are this many young queer and gender diverse Australians using Tumblr? For many, it offers an intricate network that supports safe explorations of identity and a sense of self.

For instance, writer and Tumblr user Jonno Revanche said it provides social connections that are otherwise unavailable due to geographic isolation and social anxiety. Others have used Tumblr to foster mental health support, such as Mea Pearson, who took to the platform to chronicle her experience with borderline personality disorder.

While care must be taken when associating mental health with queer identity, these matters often intersect. Evidently, many young people’s everyday dealings with key social institutions like family, work and school can be uncomfortable or even traumatic.

The view from Tumblr

Many of our respondents said that Tumblr was crucial to nurturing their individual identity. One person said it helped them identify as agender (loosely defined as without gender).

I actually learnt about agender and all the other genders from Tumblr. (20, agender, bisexual, rural)

One participant described how Tumblr assisted them in coming to terms with their pansexuality (attraction to all genders), and finding a space where this was more accepted and not reduced to bisexuality:

I came out as Pan on Tumblr a few years ago, when being Pan was seen as just a fancy way of saying Bi. I felt very alone for a long time, but found other Pan people to talk to. (22, non-binary, pansexual, urban)

Other participants attributed Tumblr to broadening their overall understanding of identity:

I had no idea that lgbt+ people existed (my parents are quite homophobic and very strict, so you could say I was very sheltered), and by using Tumblr I was able to fully immerse myself within its very lgbt+ culture. It also brought up words … I had never heard before, and through this I was able to “find myself” within a safe environment. (17, female, lesbian, urban)

I would’ve never realised my real gender or sexual orientation without tumblr. (25, trans masculine, asexual, regional)

For many Tumblr users, the platform is a supportive place. Engaging with online peer networks can be easier, and less risky, than talking to close friends. Young people reported making friends on Tumblr too, and most of them felt safe in doing so, citing the ability to block and unfollow others if needed.

I’ve made a lot of friends through there, and Tumblr helped me working out my own sexuality when I was younger. Because when I was younger I didn’t know anything, I thought there was just gay and lesbian and when I didn’t fit into any of those categories I was like “what the hell do I do now.” It was honestly, like going on Tumblr and [finding] there’s this thing where you can like more then one, I was like “woah, that’s amazing.” (19, trans male, queer, urban)

Disconnecting from Tumblr

At the same time, these digital spaces come with their own challenges. Although Tumblr is often used daily, it also seems to have a limited lifespan – which is unsurprising, given the intensity of interaction and content that many users report. Some respondents discussed their need to disconnect from the site to avoid drama, to free up time, or to spend more time in other social media spaces.

I stopped [using Tumblr] because I often used it to talk about my problems and it got to be really upsetting to have such a negative space. I feel like it just fed my mental health issues. (18, non-binary, bisexual, rural)

In this sense, Tumblr can be productive for a time but it can also become overwhelming. Users manage this by moving between platforms and taking breaks.

Safe spaces

At a time when young queer and gender diverse people are in the spotlight, with support programs coming under fire and human rights being trampled upon in political crossfires, they continue to find and build their own safe spaces.

LGBTIQA+ young people should feel safe and empowered in everyday physical spaces, and many do – often with support from a wider community of peers who share similar experiences.

But until the world becomes more friendly for queer and gender diverse people, we expect they’ll continue to find safety, community, identity, and friendship on Tumblr.

Paul Byron, Associate Lecturer, Macquarie University and Brady Robards, Lecturer in Sociology, Monash University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

The Big Lie and How It Travels

After White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer audaciously lied, in his first news media briefing, about the attendance estimates at Friday's presidential inauguration, a friend on Facebook posted an analysis that has since gone viral on social media, particularly on Twitter.  For instance, Oscar-winning composer John Legend, Helen Hayes award-winning actor Will Gartshore, and Republican political consultant Ana Navarro all tweeted a screenshot of the mini-essay to their thousands of Twitter followers.

The provocative analysis has caused a stir -- a real conversation about facts, lies, and propaganda -- so, since the original author gave his permission to "copy and paste" his status as long as his name was removed and the originator remained anonymous, I'm offering it here to expand its reach. It deserves to be read, reposted, restated, and challenged.

The White House

If you are puzzled by the bizarre "press conference" put on by the White House press secretary this evening (angrily claiming that Trump's inauguration had the largest audience in history, accusing them of faking photos and lying about attendance), let me help explain it. This spectacle served three purposes:

1. Establishing a norm with the press: they will be told things that are obviously wrong and they will have no opportunity to ask questions. That way, they will be grateful if they get anything more at any press conference. This is the PR equivalent of "negging," the odious pick-up practice of a particular kind of horrible man (e.g., Donald Trump).

2. Increasing the separation between Trump's base (1/3 of the population) from everybody else (the remaining 2/3). By being told something that is obviously wrong—that there is no evidence for and all evidence against, that anybody with eyes can see is wrong—they are forced to pick whether they are going to believe Trump or their lying eyes. The gamble here—likely to pay off—is that they will believe Trump. This means that they will regard media outlets that report the truth as "fake news" (because otherwise they'd be forced to confront their cognitive dissonance.)

U.S. Capitol

3. Creating a sense of uncertainty about whether facts are knowable, among a certain chunk of the population (which is a taking a page from the Kremlin, for whom this is their preferred disinformation tactic). A third of the population will say "clearly the White House is lying," a third will say "if Trump says it, it must be true," and the remaining third will say "gosh, I guess this is unknowable." The idea isn't to convince these people of untrue things, it's to fatigue them, so that they will stay out of the political process entirely, regarding the truth as just too difficult to determine.

This is laying important groundwork for the months ahead. If Trump's White House is willing to lie about something as obviously, unquestionably fake as this, just imagine what else they'll lie about. In particular, things that the public cannot possibly verify the truth of. It's gonna get real bad.

The point is, if the Trump administration and the President himself are willing to lie about such petty things as the number of people who were or were not on the National Mall on January 20, what will they do when they want to send American soldiers into battle in some far-off place? What will they do when the Bureau of Labor Statistics issues a monthly unemployment figures that is unflattering to the Administration? What will they do when the number of anti-Administration protesters far outnumbers the guests at the inauguration?

A final note: Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau proves himself amazingly adept at interpreting Donald Trump. His comic strip today, which had to have been drawn days before the inauguration, as the President in the White House challenging the news media's reports on the inauguration's attendance numbers. You can't make this stuff up.

Update: Russian chess champion and political dissident Garry Kasparov made a similar, and pithy, point on Twitter:

The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth.

— Garry Kasparov (@Kasparov63) December 13, 2016

On the Radio This Week: Guest Hosting 'Inside Charlottesville'

At the invitation of regular host Coy Barefoot, I will be substituting for him two days this week (Thursday and Friday) and two days next week (also Thursday and Friday).

Coy's show is called "Inside Charlottesville" and it is heard Monday through Friday from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. on 107.5 WCHV-FM.  There is also a live stream on line (scroll down for more information).

I have already lined up a good group of guests who, I expect, will provoke an interesting conversation.  We'll be talking about sex offenders, Austrian economics, capital punishment, local politics, libertarianism, poet and Civil War nurse Walt Whitman, ethics, theatre, and the state of the law and litigation -- and that's just in the first four hours this week!

Tomorrow's guests (Thursday, July 23) will be:

Andrew Extein, executive director, Center for Sexual Justice (4:00 p.m. -- all times EDT)
Jimmy Morrison, documentary film maker, “The Bubble” (4:30 p.m.)
Marc Hyden, national advocacy coordinator, Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty (5:00 p.m.)
and
Anson Parker, candidate for Charlottesville City Council (5:30 p.m.)

Friday's guests (July 24) will be:

David Boaz, executive vice president at the Cato Institute and author, The Libertarian Mind: A Manifesto for Freedom (4:00 p.m. EDT)
Garrett Peck, historian and author, Walt Whitman in Washington, D.C. (4:30 p.m.)
Jack Marshall, lawyer/ethicist, and co-founder and artistic director, The American Century Theater (5:00 p.m.)
and
Walter Olson, editor and publisher of Overlawyered.com and author of Schools for Misrule: Legal Academia and an Overlawyered America (5:30 p.m.)

The schedule for next week is not completely filled out, but my guests on Thursday, July 30, and Friday, July 31, will include Wayne State University philosophy professor John Corvino; Steve Foerster, president of New World University; Will Hammer, Libertarian candidate for the Virginia General Assembly; and Thomas P. Rosandich, president of the United States Sports Academy.

I'll have more details about next week's shows as we draw closer to those dates and I've had a chance to flesh out the schedule.

In the meantime, tune in to WCHV-FM 107.5 in Charlottesville or listen to the livestream at www.insidecville.com.  That's where you'll be able to hear the podcasts if you miss the live broadcast.  If you want to call in to join the conversation, the number is 434-964-1075.  (I'll be repeating that a lot when we go on the air.)

Who Are the Top 10 Charlottesville News Media Personalities on Twitter?

Taking a cue from FishbowlDC, which this week ranked the top ten Washington, D.C.-based anchors for national news shows based on their number of Twitter followers, I became curious about how Twitter is used by broadcast personalities in the Charlottesville media market.

Looking at the on-air talent listed on the web sites for WVIR-TV NBC29, the Charlottesville Newsplex (CBS19, WAHU-TV27, WVAW-TV16), WINA-AM, and WCHV-AM&FM, and then looking for Twitter handles for each of those listed, I made a few surprising discoveries.

First, the vast majority of broadcast media reporters and anchors have very few Twitter followers. Only a relative handful have more than 300 and most have fewer than 200 followers -- and some are in the single digits.

Second, the Newsplex seems to be making the greatest effort to leverage social media -- or at least Twitter -- by making it easy for someone looking at the Newsplex web site to locate and follow talent on Twitter. Every nember of the Newsplex's on-air maintains a personal Twitter account, although Bradley Ussery's is designated as @CBS19Weather. With 2,418 followers, this is the top Twitter account among those I found, but since it is not a personal account, I do not include it in the top ten.

Third, WINA-AM seems to make virtually no effort at promoting itself and its programs on Twitter. I could not find accounts for WINA Morning News hosts Jane Foy and Rick Daniels, and noontime host Rob Schilling and afternoon host Les Sinclair have only 173 and 243 followers, respectively.

Fourth, although NBC29 seems not to be making as concerted an effort at Twitter engagement as its rival the Newsplex, its individual talent are not doing so badly under the circumstances. Reporter Henry Graff is ranked second while his colleague Matt Talhelm just missed the cut, coming in 12th according to my research.

Only one radio personality, Coy Barefoot of WCHV-FM, made the top ten list, but he also has a Sunday morning TV program on CBS19, which could possibly boost his following.

I did not include print media in this study, which now would include just The Daily Progress and C-VILLE, so the available sample of Twitter accounts may not be satisfying.

Here is the list of Charlottesville's top ten broadcast media personalities on Twitter:

1) Travis Koshko (Newsplex) / @TravisKoshko / 2,186 followers

2) Henry Graff (NBC29) / @HenryGraff / 1,529

3) Dan Schutte (Newsplex) / @schuttedan / 1,410

4) Coy Barefoot (WCHV-FM/CBS19) / @coybarefoot  / 1,289

5) Chris Stover (Newsplex) / @ChrisStover / 1,198

6) Michelle Rupp (Newsplex) /@MichelleRupp /1,000

7) Bo Sykes (Newsplex) / @bosykes / 972

8) Ed Sykes (NBC29) / @EdSykes29 / 963

9) Mary Dunleavy (NBC29) / @MaryDunleavy29 / 809

10) Evanne Armour (Newsplex) / @EvanneArmour / 802 

 I don't make any judgments about the quality of these broadcast journalists' work, other than to suggest that these ten are making a greater effort -- some with corporate support, some without -- to engage their audience through one social media platform, Twitter.

I would welcome any comments from the people listed about how they use Twitter, whether they are satisfied with the results of their experience, and whether they prefer Twitter over other social media platforms (such as Facebook, LinkedIn, or Instagram, for example) or vice versa.  What are your goals in using Twitter?

I would also be interested in hearing from those who follow these ten (or any other local media personalities).  What do you gain from following them on Twitter?  What suggestions do you have for improving their engagement with you as an audience member?  How can Twitter be better integrated with the broadcast experience? 

Leave your comments below, or Tweet them to me at @rick_sincere.

Pollster Scott Rasmussen Addresses RightOnline Conference: Video

Scott Rasmussen

Three previous posts this week featured videos of presentations at the 2012 RightOnline conference in Las Vegas, which took place on June 15 and 16 at the Venetian Hotel.

The first post was about former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and current Nevada Third District Congressman Joe Heck.

The second one included speeches by two highly-rated talk-radio hosts, Lars Larson and Rusty Humphries.

The third had speeches by authors S.E. Cupp and Jonah Goldberg, as well as a panel discussion with the two of them plus Larson.

This entry in the series features a dinner address by Scott Rasmussen, founder and president of the Rasmussen Reports public opinion polling firm (and also co-founder of ESPN, but that's just a historical tidbit).

A few hours before his speech, I had an opportunity to interview Rasmussen about the polling business.  Here's an excerpt:

Rasmussen has also noted a change in attitudes over the past twenty years since he began doing public opinion surveys, when issues like gay marriage were not even being discussed.

Beginning with a caveat that he did not “want to overstate this in a political sense,” he pointed out that “the biggest change is that, as a younger generation comes along,” there are more apparent “libertarianish attitudes.”

What this means, Rasmussen explained, is that “people believe they have the right to make decisions for their own lives and they’re very comfortable with that. They get pretty offended when somebody tries to tell them they can’t do something.”

That attitude, he said, “would apply to something like same-sex marriage or to a whole range of other cultural and social issues coming up.”

Rasmussen's post-dinner speech covered a wide range of issues. It's best to let it speak for itself:

Scott Rasmussen is the author, most recently, of The People's Money: How Voters Will Balance the Budget and Eliminate the Federal Debt. His other books include In Search of Self-Governance, A Better Deal : Social Security Choice, and (with Douglas Schoen) Mad As Hell: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

S.E. Cupp and Jonah Goldberg at RightOnline 2012: Videos

Jonah Goldberg and S.E. Cupp

In two previous posts that featured videos from the RightOnline conference held in Las Vegas last weekend, I included speeches by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and Nevada Congressman Joe Heck, and by radio talk-show hosts Lars Larson and Rusty Humphries.

The three videos below feature political commentators S.E. Cupp and Jonah Goldberg.  In the last one, Lars Larson joins them for a panel discussion moderated by Americans for Prosperity vice president Tracy Henke.

Cupp is known for her appearances on various cable news outlets, including Fox News and MSNBC. More recently, she has been a commentator for Glenn Beck's on-line venture, GBTV. She is also the author of Losing Our Religion: Why the Liberal Media Want to Tell You What to Think, Where to Pray, and How to Live and co-author (with Brett Joshpe) of Why You're Wrong About the Right: Behind the Myths: The Surprising Truth About Conservatives.

As was true for most of the RightOnline speakers, Cupp talked about the importance of online, citizen journalism and the use of social media to advance conservative ideas, but she also discussed how conservatives can more fully participate in popular culture.

Here is S.E. Cupp's address, on video:

Jonah Goldberg is a columnist for National Review Online (NRO) and the author of Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning and, more recently, of The Tyranny of Cliches: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas. (I also interviewed Goldberg about his new book. A podcast of that interview should be posted this weekend on Bearing Drift and an article based upon it will be published soon on Examiner.com.)

Goldberg describes himself, "in Internet years, as Methuselah," because he's been using social media since 1998, when he would stay up late at night exchanging instant messages with Andrew Breitbart.

Here are Goldberg's introductory comments:

Following their individual comments, Cupp, Goldberg, and Larson retook the stage to engage in a panel discussion.

Here's that panel:

Still more videos to come.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Sarah Palin and Joe Heck at RightOnline 2012: Video

Sarah Palin at RightOnline

RightOnline is an annual conference sponsored by Americans for Prosperity that brings together political leaders, political pundits, political bloggers, and others involved in the free-market movement to meet each other, talk about issues, and learn about techniques to improve communication in the online world of both journalism and social media.

This year RightOnline took place at the Venetian hotel in Las Vegas.

The the featured speaker on the opening night of the conference, June 15, was former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who was also the 2008 Republican nominee for Vice President.  In the years since Palin resigned mid-term as Alaska's chief executive, she has become a political commentator for Fox News and has also raised a stir with her talent for using social media (particularly Facebook) for promoting her views.

I caught Palin's speech on video and posted it to YouTube after I returned home to Charlottesville from Sin City. Including a brief introduction by AFP president Tim Phillips, the address lasts just about 35 minutes.

The next afternoon, because the conference was occurring in Las Vegas, the local Member of Congress -- U.S. Representative Joe Heck, a physician and Iraq War veteran -- addressed the lunchtime crowd. Congressman Heck spoke about the use of social media by his colleagues (he mentioned the Republican New Media Caucus, which is co-chaired by First District Virginia Representative Rob Wittman).

Here's the video of Joe Heck's speech. He is introduced by AFP vice president Tracy Henke.

Watch this blog for more video from RightOnline 2012.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Social Media Mischief at The Washington Times?

The Washington Times has an article on its web site about Thursday's Capitol Hill hearing on Don't Ask Don't Tell, the now-repealed policy that prohibits the service of open and honest gay and lesbian Americans in the military.

The headline and subhead read:

Services OK with ending ‘don’t ask’
No ‘push-back,’ brass reports to Capitol Hill

The first paragraph says:

Preparations for repealing the military’s ban on openly homosexual service members have proceeded very well — even among Marines, who have not demonstrated any resistance, the Marine Corps commandant testified Thursday.

If you click to share the story on Facebook, however, the headline reads:

Lawmaker skeptical of repeal of 'don't ask' - Washington Times

And the excerpted first paragraph, designed to appear on Facebook's feed, says:

The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said on Thursday that he is troubled by the rushed way the Obama administration is moving to repeal the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military.

Similarly, if you click to share on Twitter, you get this retweet:

RT @washtimes Congress skeptical of repeal of military's gay ban - Washington Times http://bit.ly/i1eqHq

However, if you click on a different Twitter icon, you get this:

Services OK with ending 'don't ask' - Washington Times http://t.co/la0otOW via @AddThis

(Note that the shortened URLs are different in the two different Tweets.)

And if you click on a different Facebook button, you get this:

Services OK with ending 'don't ask' - Washington Times
Preparations for repealing the military's ban on openly homosexual service members have proceeded very well — even among Marines, who have not demonstrated any resistance, the Marine Corps commandant testified Thursday.

Confused? I was.

It looks like somebody at the Washington Times -- I don't know who, but it's certainly not the reporter who wrote the story, Shaun Waterman -- is attempting to put a spin on the story through social media that is not borne out by the actual report itself.

I just noticed this by chance.  An important question to ask is, does the Washington Times do this with other articles, or is this a one-off phenomenon?  What are the ethics of changing the headline and the emphasis of a story when spreading it through social media sites?  Is this worthy of criticism?

Your thoughts are welcome in the comments space, below.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!