Geez. I'd think yahoo would have editors for this sort of thing. posted by tomorama at 6:13 PM on August 31, 2000
Well, it's repurposed Reuters, and a repackaged press release, so whatever: in previous years, it would have found its true function in the recycling bin or as a fish and chip wrapper. Probably better to worry about crimes against the language when production values get involved. posted by holgate at 9:02 PM on August 31, 2000
If a headline's function is to draw attention to itself, maybe this worked. We could see more criminally garbled English, just because it stands out. posted by scum at 6:09 AM on September 1, 2000
What? There was a Quack.com that did NOT enable access with voice?! posted by dhartung at 9:56 AM on September 1, 2000
« Older
Isolating the gene responsible for caffeine...
| And you thought you had a bad ...
Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Subscribe
posted by tomorama at 6:13 PM on August 31, 2000