6 ms·

This is an opinion piece with a red hot flamebait title and a buried lede. Surely there's a better way to start this conversation on HN.

mal10c 7y ago
Agreed!
babygoat 7y ago
There are an awful lot of hard facts presented. What parts specifically do you take issue with?
- microcolonel 7y ago
  The first six paragraphs of personal gripes, opinions, and hyperbole, for a start. If the story started and ended with hard facts, interpretation, and interview, it would be less painful to read and more effective in conveying the point. The way it's written, I'd be surprised if a healthy 20% of readers would reach the actual news: that the horizon for the government's first-party predictions of climate change is being shortened to about twenty years rather than about eighty. That would be something specific that you could make up your own mind about, instead of adopting the tedious framing, and something you could take up with your representatives and your community.
RobertRoberts 7y ago
Anyone who is voting down this comment should checkout the article. Any journalist that calls the President of the US "Mr." instead of "President" is trying to belittle them. If they writer showed respect and stuck to facts instead of baiting, then it would be more impactful to thoughtful and intelligent people. Since that is not how it is written, it comes across as an appeal to emotion.
- mattnewton 7y ago
  This is just common NYT style. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-nyt-call-president-mr-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-ny... It’s common elsewhere too. Here is a cbs news article talking about the style (using Mr. Obama in this case). https://www.cbsnews.com/news/no-disrespect-in-calling-the-president-mister/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/no-disrespect-in-calling-the-pr... Discrediting the article’s tone is easier than attacking its conclusions, but that’s not how we have a productive discussion, and I hope we can agree it’s not useful.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    If my point was to discredit it's conclusions, I would have. I pointed out that the article was appealing to baser instincts by it's writing methods. Everyone who think's I support Trump (I don't) or think climate change is hoax (I don't) assumed this. Nothing in my comment indicates this. Maybe people downvote based on emotions as well?
- foldr 7y ago
  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-nyt-call-president-mr-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-ny...
- danans 7y ago
  The Nytimes refers to nearly all people using personal, not professional, titles when their professional title is obvious from context or already previously stated in the article.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  The "Mr." stuff is just a quirk of the NY Times' opinionated editorial style; they also forego the Oxford comma despite that being a perpetual source of confusion.
- mikeash 7y ago
  Brought to you by the “fuck your feelings” crowd. “Political correctness is out of control” but how dare you follow your standard and refer to our God Emperor as a mere “Mr”!
Retra 7y ago
But what conversation is your comment meant to start?

mal10c 7y ago

Agreed!

babygoat 7y ago

There are an awful lot of hard facts presented. What parts specifically do you take issue with?

microcolonel 7y ago
The first six paragraphs of personal gripes, opinions, and hyperbole, for a start. If the story started and ended with hard facts, interpretation, and interview, it would be less painful to read and more effective in conveying the point. The way it's written, I'd be surprised if a healthy 20% of readers would reach the actual news: that the horizon for the government's first-party predictions of climate change is being shortened to about twenty years rather than about eighty. That would be something specific that you could make up your own mind about, instead of adopting the tedious framing, and something you could take up with your representatives and your community.

RobertRoberts 7y ago

Anyone who is voting down this comment should checkout the article. Any journalist that calls the President of the US "Mr." instead of "President" is trying to belittle them. If they writer showed respect and stuck to facts instead of baiting, then it would be more impactful to thoughtful and intelligent people. Since that is not how it is written, it comes across as an appeal to emotion.

mattnewton 7y ago
This is just common NYT style. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-nyt-call-president-mr-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-ny... It’s common elsewhere too. Here is a cbs news article talking about the style (using Mr. Obama in this case). https://www.cbsnews.com/news/no-disrespect-in-calling-the-president-mister/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/no-disrespect-in-calling-the-pr... Discrediting the article’s tone is easier than attacking its conclusions, but that’s not how we have a productive discussion, and I hope we can agree it’s not useful.
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  If my point was to discredit it's conclusions, I would have. I pointed out that the article was appealing to baser instincts by it's writing methods. Everyone who think's I support Trump (I don't) or think climate change is hoax (I don't) assumed this. Nothing in my comment indicates this. Maybe people downvote based on emotions as well?
foldr 7y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-nyt-call-president-mr-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-ny...
danans 7y ago
The Nytimes refers to nearly all people using personal, not professional, titles when their professional title is obvious from context or already previously stated in the article.
microcolonel 7y ago
The "Mr." stuff is just a quirk of the NY Times' opinionated editorial style; they also forego the Oxford comma despite that being a perpetual source of confusion.
mikeash 7y ago
Brought to you by the “fuck your feelings” crowd. “Political correctness is out of control” but how dare you follow your standard and refer to our God Emperor as a mere “Mr”!

Retra 7y ago

But what conversation is your comment meant to start?