3 ms·
I have no comment on the content of this at all, but I did find it odd they're calling this CEO a "snowflake" in the headline. Nope, "Snowflake Inc. Chief Exec
by blakesterz 5y ago
I have no comment on the content of this at all, but I did find it odd they're calling this CEO a "snowflake" in the headline.
Nope, "Snowflake Inc. Chief Executive Officer Frank Slootman said the cloud software maker..." he's not A snowflake, he's CEO OF Snowflake. That headlines reads different knowing the difference there.
- htrp 5y agopretty standard AP style to use the company common name (HP vs Hewlett Packard etc) .... just unfortunate that the computer company named themselves Snowflake?
- BitwiseFool 5y agoIt's an innocent coincidence. But the author could have slightly rephrased things for clarity and still have used proper English: "CEO of Snowflake Says..."
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mensetmanusman 5y agoThought the exact thing… only in this timeline would this be a thing.
- nindalf 5y agoWhat a bizarre thing to take issue with. They're not calling the CEO a Snowflake. This is how news organisations commonly refer to CEOs of companies. Here are a few examples. - Facebook CEO reveals three new features WhatsApp is working (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/facebook-ceo-reveals-three-new-features-whatsapp-is-working-on/articleshow/83206452.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/facebook-ce...) - GM CEO Barra’s pay rose to $23.7 million in 2020 (https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/gm-ceo-barras-pay-rose-226-million-2020-2021-04-30/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/gm-ceo...) - Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson explains why ... (https://www.businessinsider.com/starbucks-ceo-kevin-johnson-on-his-3-priorities-2021-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/starbucks-ceo-kevin-johnson-...)
- elliekelly 5y agoEveryone in the world has heard of Starbucks, GM, and Facebook. I’d never heard of Snowflake until today.
- LeonB 5y agoI don’t think the GP comment is “taking issue” with it - but showing that without a specific piece of knowledge it’s easily misunderstood.