Never mind, just checked and they already corrected the title on the Business Insider website. Not sure if the Twitter link preview will be updated or not.
She could argue that the amount of money changing hands makes it of "compelling public interest", i.e. requires "transparency". A lot of people would probably agree, myself not included.
However, there's an actual lie in the subheader worth correcting, which is that he gave $10M directly to nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6. That claim is contradicted in the article itself even.
Discussion
No replies yet.