Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
I then I stand corrected. He had no say in that, huh? At any rate, as I said, the whole confrontational headline isn't the issue as his solution was very different than the adminsitration's on substance. If he wasn't allowed to overrule that headline or have any say in it, then he certainly isn't guilty of rhetorical bombast, and in this case, he is getting flack for words that were not approved by him. Although I think it is totally insane that papers run editorials by authors word for word, except the title itself. I had no idea that was common, -really stupid in fact. Guess every publication need their own version of link bait. This is, after all, a business, isn't it?