Why I Hate the New York Times
(Part copied from another journal, part added on later)
I really have to analyze this, so people don't think this is just some foolish game:
This article is an example and is true for most articles at NYTimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/
"Venom Runs Thick in Fish Families, Researchers Learn"
How does that title make sense? It should be "Researchers learn that venom runs thick in fish families" or "Venom runs thick in fish families". They tack on things, put a comma in and they think its cute.
"One moment he was reaching for the telephone, the next he was out cold."
Who? What? Where? When? Why?
WTF!!!@#@$#$#$!@#
"William Leo Smith, then a 20-year-old college student, woke up on the floor of the pet shop where he worked, blinking up at a ring of worried faces and feeling as if he’d been stabbed in the hand."
Why not start with this? You didn't grab your audience. You acted cute. You need to start with the topic.
But now you start as if its a fairy tale. WTF. It should be start from the beginning. "William Smith reached into a trash can" and what was he doing? "looking for a phone that was left there." Then what: "he felt a prick and blacked out." Then you can go and say the above.
You cannot jump around in time lines! Thats not right! Thats not correct! Its journalism! Its telling how it happened, now spicing it up and spinning it! Not trying to make it interesting! If its boring, then dont write about it!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
These people are stupid.
:(
"Actually, he’d been stung by a fuzzy dwarf lionfish - a dead one, no less."
Really? You throw away fucking live fuzzy dwarf lionfish? Why not say "actually he was stung by a fuzzy dwarf lionfish" you fucking pretentious prick.
"A row of spines along the fish’s back, armed with venom, jabbed him."
Why not, instead of using so many comma splices to sound cool, say it without anything shitty like that.
And passive? Come on you bastards. "He was jabbed by a row of venomous spines."
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
"Today, a dozen years later, "
YEARS COME IN DOZENS? OMG, MR TIME, CAN I HAVE A DOZEN YEARS TO GO?
No, years are not dozens. They are twelve. Today, "TWELVE YEARS LATER," whatever happened.
God.
"A row of spines along the fish’s back, armed with venom, jabbed him."
Here is another one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/us/nationalspecial/27body.html?hp&ex=1156651200&en=6804b5d160eda376&ei=5094&partner=homepage
"A City’s Future, and a Dead Man’s Lost Past"
Dude, the comma is not needed.
"More than a week after Hurricane Katrina nearly leveled this city, workers newly assigned to collect the dead stopped on a downtown street."
Newly? Drop the newly. It doesn't matter if they just were assigned or not. They are collecting the dead. Any other words takes away from the fact that they are collecting the dead.
"There before them, on its back, lay another corpse, all but baked into a pose of submission by several hot suns."
There before them? What kind of phrase is that? Why not say "Before them." And whats up with those commas?
It should read: "Before them lay another corpse on its back, all but baked into a pose of submission by several days of hot sun."
You cant have suns. We only have one.
"The workers placed the corpse in a zippered black bag somewhat larger than the kind used to protect rented tuxedoes."
The image of dead bodies connected to tuxedoes why? And why say zippered? Now we think zip lock bags. You stupid bastard! You have no understanding of image.
"The workers placed the body," because corpse does not sound good, "into a large plastic bag."
"They slid their collection into the back of their vehicle, closed the door, and drove off into the ebbing chaos."
Their collection? What is this, pokemon? Jesus.
Okay, I'm sick now.
I really have to analyze this, so people don't think this is just some foolish game:
This article is an example and is true for most articles at NYTimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/
"Venom Runs Thick in Fish Families, Researchers Learn"
How does that title make sense? It should be "Researchers learn that venom runs thick in fish families" or "Venom runs thick in fish families". They tack on things, put a comma in and they think its cute.
"One moment he was reaching for the telephone, the next he was out cold."
Who? What? Where? When? Why?
WTF!!!@#@$#$#$!@#
"William Leo Smith, then a 20-year-old college student, woke up on the floor of the pet shop where he worked, blinking up at a ring of worried faces and feeling as if he’d been stabbed in the hand."
Why not start with this? You didn't grab your audience. You acted cute. You need to start with the topic.
But now you start as if its a fairy tale. WTF. It should be start from the beginning. "William Smith reached into a trash can" and what was he doing? "looking for a phone that was left there." Then what: "he felt a prick and blacked out." Then you can go and say the above.
You cannot jump around in time lines! Thats not right! Thats not correct! Its journalism! Its telling how it happened, now spicing it up and spinning it! Not trying to make it interesting! If its boring, then dont write about it!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
These people are stupid.
:(
"Actually, he’d been stung by a fuzzy dwarf lionfish - a dead one, no less."
Really? You throw away fucking live fuzzy dwarf lionfish? Why not say "actually he was stung by a fuzzy dwarf lionfish" you fucking pretentious prick.
"A row of spines along the fish’s back, armed with venom, jabbed him."
Why not, instead of using so many comma splices to sound cool, say it without anything shitty like that.
And passive? Come on you bastards. "He was jabbed by a row of venomous spines."
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
"Today, a dozen years later, "
YEARS COME IN DOZENS? OMG, MR TIME, CAN I HAVE A DOZEN YEARS TO GO?
No, years are not dozens. They are twelve. Today, "TWELVE YEARS LATER," whatever happened.
God.
"A row of spines along the fish’s back, armed with venom, jabbed him."
Here is another one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/27/us/nationalspecial/27body.html?hp&ex=1156651200&en=6804b5d160eda376&ei=5094&partner=homepage
"A City’s Future, and a Dead Man’s Lost Past"
Dude, the comma is not needed.
"More than a week after Hurricane Katrina nearly leveled this city, workers newly assigned to collect the dead stopped on a downtown street."
Newly? Drop the newly. It doesn't matter if they just were assigned or not. They are collecting the dead. Any other words takes away from the fact that they are collecting the dead.
"There before them, on its back, lay another corpse, all but baked into a pose of submission by several hot suns."
There before them? What kind of phrase is that? Why not say "Before them." And whats up with those commas?
It should read: "Before them lay another corpse on its back, all but baked into a pose of submission by several days of hot sun."
You cant have suns. We only have one.
"The workers placed the corpse in a zippered black bag somewhat larger than the kind used to protect rented tuxedoes."
The image of dead bodies connected to tuxedoes why? And why say zippered? Now we think zip lock bags. You stupid bastard! You have no understanding of image.
"The workers placed the body," because corpse does not sound good, "into a large plastic bag."
"They slid their collection into the back of their vehicle, closed the door, and drove off into the ebbing chaos."
Their collection? What is this, pokemon? Jesus.
Okay, I'm sick now.