|
|
|
|
|
by fizixer
3216 days ago
|
|
> I disagree that the title's author wasn't (self-)aware of Google being one of the think tank's sponsors; I think the author was indeed aware but somehow deluded themselves into thinking that the think tank could live up to the ideals of being truly independent while taking corporate funds. Let me take it to an absurd extreme and suggest the following title: "Google Lost and Can Go Suck My D" Last I checked it still qualifies as "truly independent thinking". > What title do you suggest could have been less inflammatory but still convey the same message? Was something like "Open Markets and European Commission's Finding Regarding Google" too hard? edit: nitpick, but "Finding Against X" sounds incorrect. Finding is about something, not for or against. Verdict could be for or against. Given the title itself, I don't exactly have high expectations about the quality of the article which I haven't read yet. |
|
Applauding and regretting and whatnot are both leagues more respectful than your outlandish example.