Jessica Burbank and Spencer Brown react to news that Hunter Biden has been indicted. #HunterBiden #JoeBiden About Rising: Rising is a weekday morning show wi...
I’m not defending this channel or this take, but it’s not random capitalisation. It’s called title case, you can learn to use it here: https://titlecaseconverter.com/
I’m just genuinely baffled by this idea that title case is “random”. Like even if you didn’t know this style, you could figure it out by paying attention to the patterns.
Also, as a general rule when someone’s only critique is grammatical, they don’t have much to say. It reminds me of Colbert making fun of Trump’s hair and mannerisms and never actually talking about the obvious problems baked into the whole system. His shallow critique drove me away from liberal politics and into actual leftism.
Edit: Look at the other comment, that rightly points out your attack is hollow. You’ve given them room to say that you have nothing to say, or you’d have said it. It’s given them yet another excuse to drive themselves deeper into their beliefs.
Here’s a more substantive critique: Hunter Biden doesn’t matter; the only reason people paid so much attention to Trump’s corrupt family was because of the staggering pattern of flagrant corruption that surrounds him on all sides. Just pointing out that Hunter is a bit of a fuckup doesn’t achieve that, it’s just copycat fingerpointing.
A more substantive critique of the liberals is that they are functionally conservative and only serve to prop up the status quo by presenting a more polite and less offensive version of US powerbroking. But of course right wingers can’t use that critique because it casts them as the obvious bad guys that they are.
I wasn’t critiquing grammar, I was critiquing the unprofessional practice of turning the headline into a clickbait title of a youtube video that would fit right in on a playlist titled “Triggered SJWs getting rekt vol. 630.” No legitimate news source would do that (case in point, the AP article you yourself linked). It’s obnoxious and is only good for outing the website as one with extremely poor journalistic standards and integrity.
The medium is the message. How information is conveyed is part of the information. Employing click bait and “guache” methods is part of an “appeal to emotion,” and argument that riles up the passions instead of convincing with reason. Someone presenting information coached in tools designed to inflame or incite should indeed be suspect if they, on their face, are trying to convey largely “neutral” information like the news.
It is 100% imperative to analyze the value of an information source before and during use in order to prevent disinformation and propaganda. The original poster’s critique of the videos “style” is just that.
“The medium is the message” explains that the medium (eg: internet video) affects the message that is being created. It’s a lot more subtle than “ALL CAPS means DECEPTION”.
Also, they’re titles, not arguments. And again, it’s just capitalisation. The capitalisation does not make an argument. It makes an emphasis. Yes, it’s low-brow, but it’s not wrong. Hunter Biden was indeed INDICTED.
It is literally a superficial critique. You had to make a bunch of reaches to explain how the superficial critique could somehow become substantive, but you failed to do so.
And honestly, the real reason people like to shit on this kind of title is because it gives them a sense of superiority because they would never debase themselves with such low brow material. It’s worse than an appeal to emotion - it’s an appeal to faux intellectualism.
The medium is the message is not that cut and dry. All parts of the medium of any scope affect what’s said.
You can believe what you like about peoples “real reasons” but i would call the above guesswork that at best, reaffirms what you think people believe, not what they actually do.
It’s fascinating that you had nothing to say about the fact that titles aren’t arguments and that it is clearly a superficial critique.
Also, if you really think channels that do this aren’t worth paying attention to, I ask you to explain the vlogbrothers: MASSIVE Tuberculosis News
Now, maybe you won’t bother to explain them, because you think they’re not worth listening to because they CAPITALISED a word. Of course then I could tell you that they and their audience PRESSURED a pharmaceutical company into allowing their patent to lapse so MILLIONS of lives could be saved from TB.
Of course, that sentence may have been rendered UNREADABLE to you due to the GRATUITOUS capitalisation. I apologise, because otherwise it would’ve been ABSOLUTELY worth paying attention to, but now it’s RUBBISH.
I’m not defending this channel or this take, but it’s not random capitalisation. It’s called title case, you can learn to use it here: https://titlecaseconverter.com/
I’m just genuinely baffled by this idea that title case is “random”. Like even if you didn’t know this style, you could figure it out by paying attention to the patterns.
Also, as a general rule when someone’s only critique is grammatical, they don’t have much to say. It reminds me of Colbert making fun of Trump’s hair and mannerisms and never actually talking about the obvious problems baked into the whole system. His shallow critique drove me away from liberal politics and into actual leftism.
Edit: Look at the other comment, that rightly points out your attack is hollow. You’ve given them room to say that you have nothing to say, or you’d have said it. It’s given them yet another excuse to drive themselves deeper into their beliefs.
Here’s a more substantive critique: Hunter Biden doesn’t matter; the only reason people paid so much attention to Trump’s corrupt family was because of the staggering pattern of flagrant corruption that surrounds him on all sides. Just pointing out that Hunter is a bit of a fuckup doesn’t achieve that, it’s just copycat fingerpointing.
A more substantive critique of the liberals is that they are functionally conservative and only serve to prop up the status quo by presenting a more polite and less offensive version of US powerbroking. But of course right wingers can’t use that critique because it casts them as the obvious bad guys that they are.
I wasn’t critiquing grammar, I was critiquing the unprofessional practice of turning the headline into a clickbait title of a youtube video that would fit right in on a playlist titled “Triggered SJWs getting rekt vol. 630.” No legitimate news source would do that (case in point, the AP article you yourself linked). It’s obnoxious and is only good for outing the website as one with extremely poor journalistic standards and integrity.
Oh, I see. I thought you were referring to the post title.
Well, in that case the capitalisation is not random, it is done for emphasis. It may be a bit gauche but that is also not a substantive critique.
Also, capitalisation is a feature of grammar, so your complaint is still grammatical.
Its still a substantive critique.
The medium is the message. How information is conveyed is part of the information. Employing click bait and “guache” methods is part of an “appeal to emotion,” and argument that riles up the passions instead of convincing with reason. Someone presenting information coached in tools designed to inflame or incite should indeed be suspect if they, on their face, are trying to convey largely “neutral” information like the news.
It is 100% imperative to analyze the value of an information source before and during use in order to prevent disinformation and propaganda. The original poster’s critique of the videos “style” is just that.
“The medium is the message” explains that the medium (eg: internet video) affects the message that is being created. It’s a lot more subtle than “ALL CAPS means DECEPTION”.
Also, they’re titles, not arguments. And again, it’s just capitalisation. The capitalisation does not make an argument. It makes an emphasis. Yes, it’s low-brow, but it’s not wrong. Hunter Biden was indeed INDICTED.
It is literally a superficial critique. You had to make a bunch of reaches to explain how the superficial critique could somehow become substantive, but you failed to do so.
And honestly, the real reason people like to shit on this kind of title is because it gives them a sense of superiority because they would never debase themselves with such low brow material. It’s worse than an appeal to emotion - it’s an appeal to faux intellectualism.
The medium is the message is not that cut and dry. All parts of the medium of any scope affect what’s said.
You can believe what you like about peoples “real reasons” but i would call the above guesswork that at best, reaffirms what you think people believe, not what they actually do.
It’s fascinating that you had nothing to say about the fact that titles aren’t arguments and that it is clearly a superficial critique.
Also, if you really think channels that do this aren’t worth paying attention to, I ask you to explain the vlogbrothers: MASSIVE Tuberculosis News
Now, maybe you won’t bother to explain them, because you think they’re not worth listening to because they CAPITALISED a word. Of course then I could tell you that they and their audience PRESSURED a pharmaceutical company into allowing their patent to lapse so MILLIONS of lives could be saved from TB.
Of course, that sentence may have been rendered UNREADABLE to you due to the GRATUITOUS capitalisation. I apologise, because otherwise it would’ve been ABSOLUTELY worth paying attention to, but now it’s RUBBISH.