It seems like you’re using “editorialised” as a pejorative, but I don’t necessarily understand how it’s negative. Nothing about the headline is hyperbolic or an exaggeration.

The string of events from “unsafe to work” —> “cannot work” / “went to work sick” —> “no benefits” does have a direct impact on the economy, unless I’m missing some section there.

> It seems like you’re using “editorialised” as a pejorative

No it's a dispassionate statement of fact.

Sometimes when I'm choosing not to get too wound up in current events I just want to know what's going on expressed in the simplest way possible. A briefing. I'm sure their opinion here on the impact is extremely sensible, but sometimes I'm not interested in anyone's opinions, no matter how obvious or sensible.

This thread was about how to avoid getting involved in people's opinions and just learning the essential facts that you may have to do something about, like a new law to wear a mask, wasn't it?

That's not editorial, that's analysis.

Editorial would be adding ... "and that's a bad thing" or "and that's a good thing"

Yes I suppose it's analysis - but doesn't all analysis include some editorial judgement?

I mean it isn't literally a fact that it will definitely hit the economy, unless they've got a time machine, it's just their opinion. I'm sure it will prove to be a completely correct opinion! But it's still an editorial opinion. Sometimes you don't want any opinions, you just want the facts, thanks.