3 ms·
Title of this submission: "'Walkie-Talkie' skyscraper melts Jaguar car" Title of the actual article: "'Walkie-Talkie' skyscraper melts Jaguar car parts" This
by lutusp 13y ago
Title of this submission: "'Walkie-Talkie' skyscraper melts Jaguar car"
Title of the actual article: "'Walkie-Talkie' skyscraper melts Jaguar car parts"
This is like saying, "Prime minister discusses end of world rumor" and leaving off "rumor".
- joosters 13y agoThe original seems fair enough to me. Are you insisting that the entire car is melted into a puddle before the title can leave the 'parts' bit out?
- lutusp 13y agoThat depends. What does the title say, if it's intended to convey facts?
- okwa 13y agoBy adding "parts" to the submission title, at least we're still talking about a subset of the car. Can't say the same for "rumor."
- lutusp 13y agoThat depends on whether the rumor is a subset of the truth. Sometimes true, sometimes not. Truth: Joe Smith has never beaten his wife. Rumor: Joe Smith no longer beats his wife. There's some truth in the rumor, but no rumor in the truth.
- UVB-76 13y agoIt's correct to use that terminology even when an object is only partially melted, as in this case.
- lutusp 13y agoNo, it is not correct. It exaggerates the facts. A journalist at a conscientious periodical wouldn't get away with it.