Headline is a bit sensationalist. They closed last Friday down 6-7% on the week and bounced back today to almost exactly where they were a week ago.
I notice that they are careful to phrase it in a way that does not explicitly describe cause and effect. Here, the headline merely states that one thing happened, then another. Any causality is inferred by the reader. But of course the reader will infer causality, and the writers know it, and cultivate it.
Everyday on bloomberg, cnbc, etc, they said "the dow or some stock" is down for X reason but that's nonsense. If the talking heads at bloomberg, cnbc, etc knew the reasons for daily stock/market moves, then they wouldn't be working as journalists. They'd be making bank on wall street.