3 ms·

It says to make, not to roast or cook. Make means to create.

• Jiro 5y ago
  There's a persistent belief on the Internet that if something is literally true under some strained reading, it cannot be said to deceive. It can. To "make" roast chicken, unless it specifically says otherwise, implies cooking it, either on its own, or as a prominent and relevant step. "It's the literal truth, I never said 'cook'" is sophistry.
  • twiceaday 5y ago
    This is a popular way to cloak misinformation to get it deeper into social networks. Even blatant lies often get pretty deep, but the thing to realize is that the push-back often happens when a more knowledgeable monitory notices an issue and gets loud about it. So you craft miss-information in such a way that it contains a reading where it is true. This reading is not the intended reading, clearly, it only exists to pacify a critical monitory and only when it arises (you have to stick to the original talking points otherwise). Problem solved. Now, rather than your misinformation being blatantly called out the pushback dovetails into plausibly deniable existence of multiple readings, the ill-intent behind that, and which fraction of the community probably consumed which reading... None of these spin-offs are juicy enough to go as viral as your initial message and therefore counter it so your messaging wins handily.
  • chucksta 5y ago
    So, "I use salt to make roast chicken" implies you are roasting it with salt? Its called context and comprehension, who believes you can ROAST (prolonged exposure to heat in an oven or over a fire) chicken with a hair dryer