• Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Indeed. The Title of the book and the Entirety of the Book are part of the same work! If you want to comment on the title of the book you MUST read the entirety of the book!

    The trailer for the movie and the entire movie are part of the same body of work. If you want to comment on the trailer for the movie you must see the entire movie first.

    The appetizer and the dinner are part of the same body of work if you want to comment on the appetizer you must eat the entire dinner first.

    Etc, Etc.

    If they put all the context in the title, the title would just be the article and would need its own summary.

    The title HAS a context without anything else being done. That is the point. The title (while being part of the same body of work) is alone. And here’s the thing: most people don’t see the whole movie before taking something away from the trailer. (Super-seekrit PRO TIP: The people who create the trailers know this and use it to their advantage.)

    • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Comparing a movie that takes an hour+ to watch to an article that it would take you 5 minutes to read tops to get enough context to not make dumb comments. Yeah, totally comparable.

      People like you are why I have to send multiple work emails after I’ve already mentioned all the relevant details in the first message, all because I didn’t put the whole gods damned message in the subject line.

      Take a hooked on phonics course if reading is that hard for you.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        FFS I’m not talking about the article for a reason. How (or why) you refuse to understand that is beyond me.

        Yeah yeah hooked on phonics, ace repartee. Anyway.

        • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          If you’re not going to read the article or have any interest in it, why bother interacting on the subject at all? The fuck are you even talking about then?

          • TacoSocks@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            I think you are ignoring point they are making. If the headline and article tell two different stories, those who just read the headline can come away with a different impression of what’s happening. You can argue people that just read the headline shouldn’t exist, but they do.

            • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              No, I get that that’s their point. I’m definitely making the argument that if all you’re going to read is the headline, then maybe don’t complain about missing out on the full context.