Can a clever media reporter please do a dissection of how we're watching in real-time as a domino-cascade of bad headline practice is turning "Subway doesn't use real tuna" from the central & unsupported claim of a flimsy lawsuit into a generally accepted fact

I could give a shit about protecting Subway's reputation. But there's nothing in the suit that appears to be of substance; even worse, it's full of red flags pointing to it being a suit whose goal is, in fact, the generation of news stories about the suit

This is another one where people didn't read the story! The claim was that the bread contains greater than 2% sugar, which in Ireland legally classifies it as cake. Most commercial sandwich bread in the US would also fail this standard! https://twitter.com/yesquite/status/1355182304205934598

The only thing the lawsuit says about the substance of the plaintiff's findings are "it is not tuna and it is not fish" (sorry 2 everyone being like "I bet it's butterfish/tilapia/a cheaper substitute") — this is the DEFINITION of "huge if true"

If true, one of two possibilities:
A) It's a plant-based substitute. HUGE IF TRUE. A dupe for tuna that's completely indistinguishable from tuna? A game-changer for the massive alt-meat industry!
B) It's another meat. HUGE IF TRUE. Brace 4 lawsuits from kosher & halal folks!

So what's more likely here: Subway has secretly cracked the code on cost-efficient alt-meat at scale and/or is knowingly pulling a secret-meat move despite the fact that in 2002 McDonald's got taken to the cleaners for using beef tallow to fry their fries, OR

I mean man idk maybe it IS fake tuna. Even then, there's no grounds to assume that this applies to *all* tuna served at Subway, since the chain is franchised and samples were taken at locations in close & limited proximity

but REGARDLESS of ANY OF THIS there's absolutely no excuse for headlines that lead with "Subway Tuna Contains No Actual Tuna" and then tack on ", Lawsuit Alleges" at the end unless you woke up this morning and chose clicks over clarity

The vast majority of people don't realize that *anyone* can file a lawsuit at *anyone else* and in the suit they can claim absolutely *anything.*

A lawsuit filing is a press release. A lawsuit filing that a journalist learns about via press release is DEFINITELY a press release.

Why is this making me so mad today, I have no idea, I'm going for a walk

Ok sorry one more thing: What SUPER DUPER EXTRA galls me about all these shitty headlines (especially you, Washington Post) is that putting ", Lawsuit Alleges" at the very end is EXTRA SHITTY because social shares cut the hed after certain character limits and YOU KNOW THAT

you all bullied me into unlocking my account so here, I did, you can retweet this now, be free

How to do this kind of story right: @hooleil, always great, does a textbook-perfect job here https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/If-Subway-s-tuna-isn-t-tuna-what-is-it-Bay-15906715.php