4 ms·

I think maybe the title could use some punctuation or reworking > Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner... Ok, yes, they bought Time Warner > Netflix Is Why

I think maybe the title could use some punctuation or reworking > Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner... Ok, yes, they bought Time Warner > Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner and Comcast... They bought Comcast too? > Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner and Comcast and Disney... And Disney!? > Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner and Comcast and Disney want Fox AT&T bought Time Warner and Comcast; Disney want Fox?

reubenmorais 8y ago
"Want" disambiguates to plural subject, so it can only be "Comcast and Disney want Fox".
- wging 8y ago
  It's a subtle nuance that people often get wrong, though -- or they may be speaking in a dialect like British English, where 'want' (plural subject) is used for corporate entities. (I admit the latter is unlikely for an American publication.)
- adrianmonk 8y ago
  You're absolutely right, but that still leaves it a garden path sentence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_path_sentence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_path_sentence) and thus a poor title. The measure of good writing isn't that it's possible to parse unambiguously with sufficient dedication. Good writing gets the idea across without placing any undue burden on the reader. (And it's easily fixed by adding a second "why": "Netflix is why AT&T bought Time Warner and why Comcast and Disney want Fox".)
  - bootlooped 8y ago
    Thanks for this, I didn't realize there was a term for the issue I was taking with the structure.
- always_good 8y ago
  But Disney can be plural the same way some people will write sentences like "Radiohead are awesome". It's ambiguous. There's no reason not to punctuate here.
adenadel 8y ago
AT&T bought Time Warner. Comcast and Disney both want Fox?
- iOShosts 8y ago
  Not that the Fox News outlet is the only thing that Fox does, but I for one would prefer cartoon substitutions for the human hosts on Fox News. At least it would equalize the current hosts with their true reality.
  - berbec 8y ago
    One can argue that some of the hosts on Fox already are Disney characters. Hannity/Malificant?
    - iOShosts 8y ago
      Exactly right. Reality. Though I’d expand that to include those morning show people. I don’t quite recall either their names nor the name of the show, though. Shows what I know, I guess...
undersuit 8y ago
>Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox. The comma after the 'and' in English lists allows us to apply 'why' to both "AT&T bought Time Warner" and "Comcast and Disney want Fox"
- stingraycharles 8y ago
  This is called the Oxford comma, if I’m not mistaken.
  - undersuit 8y ago
    Is it? I'm not aware of the Oxford Comma being useful in a list of two. Maybe it's because we have the "Comcast and Disney"?

reubenmorais 8y ago

"Want" disambiguates to plural subject, so it can only be "Comcast and Disney want Fox".

wging 8y ago
It's a subtle nuance that people often get wrong, though -- or they may be speaking in a dialect like British English, where 'want' (plural subject) is used for corporate entities. (I admit the latter is unlikely for an American publication.)
adrianmonk 8y ago
You're absolutely right, but that still leaves it a garden path sentence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_path_sentence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_path_sentence) and thus a poor title. The measure of good writing isn't that it's possible to parse unambiguously with sufficient dedication. Good writing gets the idea across without placing any undue burden on the reader. (And it's easily fixed by adding a second "why": "Netflix is why AT&T bought Time Warner and why Comcast and Disney want Fox".)
- bootlooped 8y ago
  Thanks for this, I didn't realize there was a term for the issue I was taking with the structure.
always_good 8y ago
But Disney can be plural the same way some people will write sentences like "Radiohead are awesome". It's ambiguous. There's no reason not to punctuate here.

adenadel 8y ago

AT&T bought Time Warner. Comcast and Disney both want Fox?

iOShosts 8y ago
Not that the Fox News outlet is the only thing that Fox does, but I for one would prefer cartoon substitutions for the human hosts on Fox News. At least it would equalize the current hosts with their true reality.
- berbec 8y ago
  One can argue that some of the hosts on Fox already are Disney characters. Hannity/Malificant?
  - iOShosts 8y ago
    Exactly right. Reality. Though I’d expand that to include those morning show people. I don’t quite recall either their names nor the name of the show, though. Shows what I know, I guess...

undersuit 8y ago

>Netflix Is Why AT&T bought Time Warner, and Comcast and Disney want Fox. The comma after the 'and' in English lists allows us to apply 'why' to both "AT&T bought Time Warner" and "Comcast and Disney want Fox"

stingraycharles 8y ago
This is called the Oxford comma, if I’m not mistaken.
- undersuit 8y ago
  Is it? I'm not aware of the Oxford Comma being useful in a list of two. Maybe it's because we have the "Comcast and Disney"?