The Dumbest Ever Question Headline
I found it.
A reminder to call you senators and representatives tomorrow morning and assure them that they can never count on your vote or support for anything in the future if they do not support the national security supplemental.
The search is over, folks—a search I didn’t even know I had undertaken.
Months back, when I started looking at really dumb New York Times and Washington Post headline questions, I didn’t full understand that I was on a quest of sorts for the dumbest such headline in the world.
But then, the other day, I found this one, and I realized that the quest I didn’t even know I had embarked upon was at an end.
Behold, the Holy Grail has been found:
I have not read a word of this article. The headline is too perfect to spoil by knowing a thing about what the article contains. But let’s consider some important points about this gem of a headline:
It is about Taylor Swift—because of course it is.
It is unclear who counts for New York Times purposes as a “tortured poet”? Is an angsty personality adequate or does one need to have undergone physical waterboarding or the rack while composing verse?
What do the “tortured poets” think about what exactly? Is the article about their thoughts on getting their own department? Or is it about their thoughts on the department’s being featured in Swift’s new album?
What about the untortured poets. Why does the New York Times not care about what they think? What about the poor poets subjected to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment that may fall just short of torture? They might have the worst of all worlds here. They go through near-torture but not treatment quite bad enough that the New York Times will care about what they think of Taylor’s forthcoming album—or the department that underlies it. That would really suck!
Just asking questions here. You should do your own research.
Speaking of dumb headline questions, I noticed this one today:
Let’s pause for a moment over this.
Because while I could be wrong, and I don’t want to be hasty here, I think it means:
THAT HIS DAD HAS CANCER!!!
There are important attendant things that this kind of meaning usually also implies. You know, visits to doctors, worry, anxiety, thinking about mortality, memories of Mom’s death. That sort of thing.
I just want to know how the heck this headline got into the New York Times.
Today’s #BeastOfTheDay is a savage monster about whose existence I was previously unaware: the giant river otter.
UPDATE: An alert reader and great American writes in to point out this particularly dumb headline question from Politico Europe: