3 ms·
No idea why he is downvoted. He is factually correct as can be seen in merriam-webster and the cambridge dictionary: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
by ascar 6y ago
No idea why he is downvoted. He is factually correct as can be seen in merriam-webster and the cambridge dictionary:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/editorialize https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/editorialize
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/editorialized https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/editoria...
As the title is just more informative, but not expressing an opinion, calling it editorialized is wrong.
And as a matter of fact, because of this comment I just learned a new word and how to use it correctly.
- thih9 6y ago> As the title is just more informative, but not expressing an opinion What is more informative or less informative (e.g. "phones containing magnets" vs "iPhone 12") could be an opinion itself. The "iPhone 12" title definitely stands out more; at the same time it puts a slightly different focus on the article. I think people here prefer to trust the author and their judgment (as long as the original title isn't open clickbait).