Heads up, the headline is kind of misleading. “Going sleeper” is just their internal slang for getting laid off. It doesn’t mean some kind of protest or activism.
The headline is stupid ... It basically says Geek Squad is laid off after getting laid off
Journalism is basically beyond saving at this point...
Journalism is basically beyond saving at this point...
I mean, it's basically a no name website. It's not like this is a NYTimes, AP, or The Atlantic headline.
Edit: I guess what I'm really asking is, it's a bad headline from a small publisher (it's surely happened many many times for decades), can't we leave it at that without the dramatization?
Overreacting and dramatization is what social media trained us to do, so I’ll go ahead and answer that question with… no, probably not. Or as social media taught me; I SLAM your comment DOWN!
I clap back at your slamming of the previous poster's comment.
If I'm not mistaken 404media is where a lot of the VICE crew ended up, so I am a bit underwhelmed/disappointed by the headline
I guess what I'm really asking is, it's a bad headline from a small publisher (it's surely happened many many times for decades), can't we leave it at that without the dramatization?
If this were an isolated example, sure.... But go to all those sources you mentioned and tell me how many times some "slammed" someone else...
But go to all those sources you mentioned and tell me how many times some “slammed” someone else
Okay ... Let's google it ... I'm open to be being bias checked; The Atlantic and NY Times.
Some "The Atlantic" examples:
"Boston Fire Chief Slammed Over His Response to Marathon Bombing"
"Northeast Slammed by Blizzard"
"The Storm Heard Round the World: How Sandy Slammed Global Aviation"
"This is What 400 Pounds of Sumo Wrestler Getting Body-Slammed Looks Like"
"HuffPo's Sex Strategy Slammed"
"Republicans Slammed for Recruiting 'Hicky' Actors for West Virginia Ad"
"Everyone's Getting 'Slammed' This Week"
Some "NYTimes" examples:
"A Window Into Chinese Government Has Now Slammed Shut"
"Trump Slammed the W.H.O. Over Coronavirus. He’s Not Alone."
"Regional Banks Slammed by Fear of a Broader Financial Crisis"
"How Mink, Like Humans, Were Slammed by the Coronavirus"
What's your point exactly? These aren't (IMO) atrocious headlines; I suppose a few could be more informative for sure but also these are like ~1 per year.
Nice malicious compliance bud...
You don't have to agree with me but #1 pretending my entire point was based on this one bad headline was miscengenous at best... #2 again taking the comment literally simply to discard it = miscengenous
Not really into trying to debate a bad faith partner here
It wasn't bad faith, but I'm blocking you for being a waste of my time.
Oh no!!!... Anyway
Exactly. They wanted to highlight the dumb “sleeper” line for some reason, even though it’s probably the least newsworthy part of the message. “Geek Squad faces huge layoffs, members call it ‘going sleeper’” is much clearer but still a waste of time and space.
By today's journalism standards, you are ready for Chief Editor!
I’m very good at wasting time and space effectively.
Hey I just downed a big bag of sour gummies and popcorn watching movies at home... If I keep this up I'll challenge anyone for more wasted space!
Shine on, lazy diamond.
It says that in the article
Edit: not really sure why I got downvoted. The whole article is like 20 sentences. This isn't some kind of high brow journalism. The whole thing takes less than a minute to read.
And we all know everybody’s great at reading the article.
Headlines aren't supposed to be deep cuts to geeksquad lingo that's only explained in the body.
Heads up, the headline is kind of misleading. “Going sleeper” is just their internal slang for getting laid off. It doesn’t mean some kind of protest or activism.
The headline is stupid ... It basically says Geek Squad is laid off after getting laid off
Journalism is basically beyond saving at this point...
I mean, it's basically a no name website. It's not like this is a NYTimes, AP, or The Atlantic headline.
Edit: I guess what I'm really asking is, it's a bad headline from a small publisher (it's surely happened many many times for decades), can't we leave it at that without the dramatization?
Overreacting and dramatization is what social media trained us to do, so I’ll go ahead and answer that question with… no, probably not. Or as social media taught me; I SLAM your comment DOWN!
I clap back at your slamming of the previous poster's comment.
If I'm not mistaken 404media is where a lot of the VICE crew ended up, so I am a bit underwhelmed/disappointed by the headline
If this were an isolated example, sure.... But go to all those sources you mentioned and tell me how many times some "slammed" someone else...
Okay ... Let's google it ... I'm open to be being bias checked; The Atlantic and NY Times.
Some "The Atlantic" examples:
Some "NYTimes" examples:
What's your point exactly? These aren't (IMO) atrocious headlines; I suppose a few could be more informative for sure but also these are like ~1 per year.
Nice malicious compliance bud...
You don't have to agree with me but #1 pretending my entire point was based on this one bad headline was miscengenous at best... #2 again taking the comment literally simply to discard it = miscengenous
Not really into trying to debate a bad faith partner here
It wasn't bad faith, but I'm blocking you for being a waste of my time.
Oh no!!!... Anyway
Exactly. They wanted to highlight the dumb “sleeper” line for some reason, even though it’s probably the least newsworthy part of the message. “Geek Squad faces huge layoffs, members call it ‘going sleeper’” is much clearer but still a waste of time and space.
By today's journalism standards, you are ready for Chief Editor!
I’m very good at wasting time and space effectively.
Hey I just downed a big bag of sour gummies and popcorn watching movies at home... If I keep this up I'll challenge anyone for more wasted space!
Shine on, lazy diamond.
It says that in the article
Edit: not really sure why I got downvoted. The whole article is like 20 sentences. This isn't some kind of high brow journalism. The whole thing takes less than a minute to read.
And we all know everybody’s great at reading the article.
Headlines aren't supposed to be deep cuts to geeksquad lingo that's only explained in the body.