I commented on the inaccuracy of the headline and the implication that has for the current journalistic quality of BoingBoing. That is all. There is an important difference between “appears to hit” and “appears to have hit.” They chose the former for click bait reasons.
That, and that alone, was what I commented on. Now please explain why you are lumping me in with the victim-blames.
Well, we have a serious deficiency in ‘TV Movie of the Week’ ideas. There will now be a movie script and two books, quite possibly.
You guys realize that “Airplane” was not an instruction manual?
I miss Nielsen though… damn, now I made myself sad…
That’s relevant how…?
Probably because you were arguing semantics and headline writing rather than the substance of the story. My apologies. I was frustrated at the victim blaming and took your disappointment in BoingBoing to mean that you felt the woman was in the wrong.
On the subject of click bait headlines … I’m actually kind of over that criticism. Headlines have always been written to grab attention, including to the point of sometimes being technically wrong, and often being an exaggeration. This was true when print newspapers were the dominant form of media, and it’s still true today. The internet didn’t invent that.
i’m not the biggest fan of companies and their bullies… but I was on a flight today from LAX to San Antoniot… then to Love Field in Dallas *yes southwest"
It was made clear 20 minutes into the flight that the rear toilet was malfunctioning and it was CLEARLY announced that it was against FEDERAL regulation to congregate around the front cabin.
I made it a point to thank the staff for their restraint.
People just ain’t no good.
Most. Appropriate. Typo. Ever!
(Not your typo, I know.)
Ah, allow me to introduce you to America’s favorite sport: Victim Blaming!
FTFY
Though certainly they aren’t unique in that regard among carriers.
That’s the great thing about unregulated capitalism, all the competition has been strangled dead.
Well, I was ready to abandon my piece of vaguely marxist smart-assery, when I read your comment invoking one of the deadly sins, and I thought, now that we’ve gone all morals on this, I can just as well… What I find kind of funny about this is how some people would say that you and I have said the exact same thing, while others would vigorously disagree.
Not mentioned in the BB post, it was a double wide stroller.
Cheers to that man (my guess is he is a fellow Texan) for taking a stand. I’ve heard from multiple sources today that what he did could land him in jail and that threatening a airline employee is a crime. Yeah? So? What about endangering a child? The way I see it, we have have the right if not the duty to protect those who need protecting, law be damned.
Not really. SUV strollers and massive baby-supply bags are just another American status symbol. You need diapers/wipes, a couple snacks and a couple of toys. That’s it.
Your post:
‘There’s no video I can watch’ (despite there being a textual transcript of the event).
‘I hearby conclude the entitled woman was doing XYZ’ (despite the lack of video evidence).
Your powers of deduction are clearly superior to actual evidence. These entitled bitches and their strollers, amirite?
Source?
Such is life; most people are beholden to their perceptions.
Moving on…
…because it lit up like fire on the web.
You seem to be suggesting no one should bother talking about it since it ended up all right, but it only ended up all right because people talked about it.
called your… land line?
