NJ State Rep. Sponsoring Bill With a ‘Spicy’ Name: The F**K ICE Act
Civil Discourse? Not Today: Steve Warhola, Top Staffer for PA State Sen. John...
Hot Take: Iran, a 6,000-Year-Old Civilization, Is Not Going to Surrender
Only in LA: Run 18 Miles, Identify as a Marathon Finisher, Collect Your...
Rolling Stone: 'Apparent' Neo-Nazi Now the GOP Nominee for Texas House Seat
Plaque Honoring the Heroism of Capitol Police Officers on January 6 Installed in...
'Believe Women' Except When They're Jewish: Bernie Alum Briahna Joy Gray Denies 'Mass...
Kash Patel Announces Arrest of Illegal Charged With Repeatedly Doing the Thing Dems...
ABC News: Sinking of Iranian Warship 'Raises Questions' About Whether the Attack Was...
Ben Rhodes Trips Over Pallets of Cash While Wishing Eternal Shame on Supporters...
School Isn't Daycare—But We've Made It One: Working Mom Shocked by 70-Hour Week...
DHS Drops a Receipt on Intel Committee Dem About ICE Arresting a Journo...
Chris Hayes and Mehdi Hasan: The Dynamic Duo of Dishonesty – Smearing U.S....
In Viral Moment, Rubio Rejects Interpreter, Drops Fluent Spanish Breakdown of Trump's 'Don...
Geriatric Meltdown Alert: Senile Swamp Creature James Carville Begs God to Supercharge His...

The AP and Breaking911 had the exact same headline about FDA restricting J&J vaccine ... guess which one Twitter flagged as 'misleading'

In case you missed it, yesterday, the FDA put strict limits on who can get Johnson & Johnson’s COVID vaccine.

Advertisement

More from the AP:

FDA’s vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks said the agency decided to restrict the vaccine after taking another look at the data on the risks of life-threatening blood clots and concluding that they are limited to J&J’s vaccine.

“If there’s an alternative that appears to be equally effective in preventing severe outcomes from COVID-19, we’d rather see people opting for that,” Marks said. “But we’ve been careful to say that– compared to no vaccine– this is still a better option.”

Under the new FDA instructions, J&J’s vaccine could still be given to people who had a severe allergic reaction to one of the other vaccines and can’t receive an additional dose. J&J’s shot could also be an option for people who refuse to receive the mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, and therefore would otherwise remain unvaccinated, the agency said.

This is a pretty big deal, so it’s understandable that an account like @Breaking911 would cover it as well. And they did.

But their coverage was a little different from the AP’s. See if you can spot it.

Here’s the AP’s headline:

And here’s Breaking911’s headline:

See the difference yet? No? Well, clearly you’re not as discerning as Twitter, who saw a huge difference:

Clearly the AP’s tweet was acceptable as-is, but Breaking911’s was not. Wonder what that’s about.

Advertisement

https://twitter.com/RBPundit/status/1522586360334401539

Almost. But they’d never do something like that, would they?

Some tweeters out there are actually defending Twitter’s selective “misleading” label by saying that Breaking911’s tweet lacked the context of the AP’s. But evidently Twitter couldn’t even buy that:

Baby steps.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement