I wasn’t critiquing grammar, I was critiquing the unprofessional practice of turning the headline into a clickbait title of a youtube video that would fit right in on a playlist titled “Triggered SJWs getting rekt vol. 630.” No legitimate news source would do that (case in point, the AP article you yourself linked). It’s obnoxious and is only good for outing the website as one with extremely poor journalistic standards and integrity.
Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
Oh, I see. I thought you were referring to the post title.
Well, in that case the capitalisation is not random, it is done for emphasis. It may be a bit gauche but that is also not a substantive critique.
mosiacmango@lemm.ee 6 months ago
Its still a substantive critique.
The medium is the message. How information is conveyed is part of the information. Employing click bait and “guache” methods is part of an “appeal to emotion,” and argument that riles up the passions instead of convincing with reason. Someone presenting information coached in tools designed to inflame or incite should indeed be suspect if they are trying to pretend to be conveying largely “neutral” information like the news.
Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
“The medium is the message” explains that the medium (eg: internet video) affects the message that is being created. It’s a lot more subtle than “ALL CAPS means DECEPTION”.
Also, they’re titles, not arguments. And again, it’s just capitalisation.
It is literally a superficial critique. You had to make a bunch of reaches to explain how the superficial critique could somehow become substantive, but you failed to do so.
And honestly, the real reason people like to shit on this kind of title is because it gives them a sense of superiority because they would never debase themselves with such low brow material. It’s worse than an appeal to emotion - it’s an appeal to faux intellectualism.
mosiacmango@lemm.ee 6 months ago
The medium is the message is not that cut and dry. All parts of the medium of any scope, affect what’s said.
You can believe what you like about peoples “real reasons” but i would call the above guesswork that at best, reaffirms what you think people believe, not what they actually do.