Every Damn Article…

That talks about what someone famous person posts on “X”, the person who wrote the article, always feels it’s important to include how “X” was formerly called twitter. Like how dafuq is that important? Like they will post, so and so said this on X formerly twitter. It is pretty obvious that when famous people say weird stuff it is almost always on “X”. You don’t need to clarify where it was posted and what the place was formally called. Plus a lot of the time they will share screen grabs of the comment anyway. That is a lot of extra stuff.

This post is closed and no longer available for commenting.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Carissimi · F

You do have to clarify. When I asked was anyone here on X, some thought I was talking about a drug, so now for people who don’t know the name has changed, I say Twitter/X.

MsAnnThropy

@Carissimi When people screen grab posts from facebook and then use it in articles, they don’t say this person said this on meta formerly facebook. They just say facebook. People should generally know by now that X is X. They can even say the “website X”, as to differentiate it from the drug.

Carissimi · F

Well, generally people don’t know, so just because you think they should know, doesn’t mean they do. Anyway, why is that a problem for you. It’s no big deal. @MsAnnThropy

MsAnnThropy

@Carissimi I never said it was a problem did I? No. Only that it doesn’t need to be mentioned every single time someone on x says something that is remotely newsworthy. It’s called an observation.

This post is closed and no longer available for commenting.