EASILY MISUNDERSTOOD
We know that headlines rarely tell the truth, but SOME are so misleading that they are dangerous to the mind.
The Washington Post headline states: “Trump plan would limit disability benefits for older Americans” Meryl Kornfield and Lisa Rein, October 5, 2025
Three problems with this headline…first they aren’t talking about “older” Americans. They are talking about middle-aged Americans. They are talking about people of “working age.” When you turn 65 (that’s when you become an “older American”) you no longer qualify for disability benefits (but you probably qualify for Social Security benefits). For some purposes “older American” is a term appropriate for those 60 and older, but for ages 50-59 it is not.
Second, the story has NOTHING to do with those who already have disability benefits. Their benefits would NOT be limited since they are already in the system.
Third, the authors admit that it is NOT a firm plan. “… officials are considering eliminating age as a factor entirely or raising the threshold to age 60” (from the current standard of age 50). They are CONSIDERING a change to the system which COULD make receiving disability benefits at ages 50 to 59 per the NORMAL requirements for those age 18-49. You see, if you read the entire article (I saved you the waste of time) you would see that currently the government considers being 50 as an extra disability. What? Just being middle-aged is a disability? And there are people who agree with that?
I’ve been 50. 50 is NOT a disabling factor in my mind. A 50 year old is hirable, can learn new skills, and is more likely to be a benefit to a company than many 24 year olds would be. (I helped run a small business and will admit that we LOOKED for 40 and 50 year olds. We would hire a 50 year old twice as quickly as a 24 year old. (We hired a 62 year old once. He was an excellent employee.) They typically worked smarter and stayed longer on staff than the younger workers. Plus, our customers PREFERRED the older employees. So, I’m offended that people want to chuck 50 year olds into the “they might as well be disabled” box.)
Finally, here’s how much time these Washington Post reporters spent researching their “gotcha” article: “It is unclear exactly how many Americans could lose access to disability benefits under the proposed rule changes.” I already know the answer: NONE. None will “lose” disability benefits who presently are on disability. There may be a few, if changes are made, who will not get the benefits. Those would be individuals who are not disabled “enough” to meet the criteria, but would meet the “I’m over 50 and that makes me disabled” criteria. Age is not really a “disability.” I met a woman who worked to age 90 and only quit when she could no longer stand on her feet for long periods of time. I know an 82 year old who works harder every week than many 24 year olds I’ve met. We had our gutters and soffits replaced by a different 80 year old man just 3 years ago. Being of working age is not a disability. But “ageism” is a sad reality.
So, is ending ageism a problem? I think not. If the person (age 50) is actually disabled the system WILL work for him or her. But we won’t be claiming anymore that 50 year olds are “only worth 2/3 of a person.” That kind of thinking is not good for us as a nation.
(A repeat topic, but this kind of false headline leads to misunderstanding)
NBC News: “The 15 most banned books in U.S. Schools”
This raises misunderstandings because the word “BANNED” has a distinct meaning, which NBC News purposely ignored.
Presently in America there are absolutely ZERO banned books. You can buy and have in your possession in America any book ever published on the planet. However, some things are not appropriate for 8 year olds. “Banned” means that the book may not be published, sold, or possessed. Such a book is “forbidden” in society. However, since there are ZERO “forbidden” books which may not be published, sold, or owned the headline is entirely FALSE.
The word NBC News should have used is “restricted.” It is appropriate to restrict certain writings in school libraries. Many schools refuse to have a copy of the Bible. Others refuse to permit the Koran. It would be inappropriate for an elementary school to have ANY books on sex or sexual experience in its library. That just makes sense to sensible people. We do the same thing with movies, by the way. Those subjects which are inappropriate for a certain age group are “banned” for children (if you want to misuse the term) and they are rated “Adult,” “R,” “PG,” or “PG-13.”
I oppose anyone who suggests such books “belong” in elementary schools. That’s ignorant! I also wouldn’t want any 7 year old relative to attend a working session of Congress (too many bad words and strange ideas). Children deserve to be protected from the utter coarseness of society. I wouldn’t take a child to a murder scene (with or without the dead body). We should give children a safe area to grow and develop. If we don’t we will give them hopelessness, which many adults now experience. There are so many hopeless adults who are addicted to alcohol, drugs, sex workers, gambling, and violence … but we try to keep our children OUT of those places where drugs, alcohol, sex workers, gambling, and violence exist. We should! It is just wrong to lead a child INTO a burning building.
There are some who suggest that America SHOULD “ban” certain books to benefit our society. I’m not one of those, but I can see the reasoning. If a book has little redeeming value, maybe it should die. Even trees die when they have few redeeming qualities remaining.
Humorously, Vogue has this headline: “The Exercise That Takes Off 20 Years.”
I think I know what they mean, but that’s not what they said. Easy to misunderstand the chosen headline.
Do they mean that you’ll look 20 years younger, or that you’ll die 20 years earlier? Words have meanings. Choose those which best convey what you want your reader to understand!
Copyright 2025 Donald Whelpley
[PLEASE NOTE that Don is always open to discussing the thoughts and opinions he shares here and welcomes comments as shared in the comment section. He doesn’t use other social media platforms and won’t see whatever you’d like to share with him if you post it elsewhere.
ALSO, Don is always open to offer his thoughts on various topics. If you have a specific request, you can let him know in a comment; he reads – and replies to – them all. ~ Sherry]
See more GUEST POSTS from Don
Comments