As someone who works in a newsroom, let me tell you why this title was the way it was.

News people are used to candidates conceding when they can't win. After the meeting with Hillary, everyone assumed he would concede because that's how things play out. I mentioned a few times that he wasn't going to concede, but I was the only person saying that.

Even when he said during the speech that he was going to convention, they assumed he would concede. This wasn't just in the newsroom. People on Twitter were saying things about how it sounded like he was trying to let his supporters down gently.

As it went on, I mentioned again that I don't think he's going to concede. Others still said they thought he would. They were waiting for it. They wanted to be on the ball to report his concession the moment it happened. This was the expected story.

When the stream ended, one person who wasn't paying as much attention at the moment said "wait, did he just concede?" I told them no.

I sent out the tweet (with a link to the full video and first draft of the story) Saying that Sanders calls for unity against Trump (another major point of the speech) That he will go to convention, and that he was not conceding.

The first reply we got to the tweet was "He kinda technically dos though" Even it seemed like most of the audience expected it to be a concession speech.

The story itself ended up being written as a brief overview of his calls for unity and his talk about the point of the movement and his hopes for moving forward. But with everyone expecting concession, I can completely understand how him not conceding became the focus of other news outlets' stories. Not because they have some intention of painting him as a stubborn old man (though there definitely was some of that sentiment among some people in the newsroom) but because it was a reversal of their expectations.