4 ms·
> [...] it still feels very misleading [...] referencing the country VS the state of Georgia You know, there exists a world outside the US. And yet, when "Geor
by adwn 7y ago
> [...] it still feels very misleading [...] referencing the country VS the state of Georgia
You know, there exists a world outside the US. And yet, when "Georgia" and "nation" is mentioned in the same sentence, you feel misled because it doesn't refer to the US state of Georgia? The problem is with you, not with the headline.
- ickelbawd 7y agoNah. It’s still ambiguous. I also read it to be referring to the state of Georgia in the the US Nation. It would be a lot clearer to say Nation of Georgia. Then there’s no ambiguity.
- adwn 7y ago> It’s still ambiguous. It's a headline, not a summary. > I also read it to be referring to the state of Georgia in the the US Nation. It's okay to misunderstand the headline – if I were a resident of the US, I would have probably interpreted "Georgia" as the US state as well. But it is not justified to blame this on the headline, or to feel "misled" by it.
- anm89 7y agoI'm writing the comment from outside the US. The fact that they referenced Georgia and "nation" seperately is part of what made me think they were referencing a Georgia that was part of a nation not a Georgia that was a nation. The language is confusing. Also the GDP of the state of Georgia is 30x larger than the country of Georgia and it has 300% of the population. The state is a drastically more important world player than the country (IE it would be drastically bigger news if this was true of the state than the country). There is nothing US centric about this.