[rntz]

The article appears to misrepresent the result of a study it links to. From the article:

> A study conducted by researchers in Switzerland found that a wine labelled with a difficult-to-read script was liked more by drinkers than the same wine carrying a simpler typeface.

But from the abstract of the study linked to (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09503...):

> Fluency was manipulated via an easy- or difficult-to-read font. Results showed that there was no effect of the consumption domain. However, the wine was liked more in the high-fluency condition compared to the low-fluency condition. Thus, the results indicate that a wine tastes better if the labeled visual information can be processed relatively fluently.

Which is exactly the opposite.

[periheli0n]

I found the article generally quite clickbaity.

Is it a “trick” to use “grass-fed Angus steak with thick-cut rosemary fries“ rather than just say “steak and chips”, as the article claims? I don’t think so. The former is a more detailed description of what’s being offered. The latter refers to a much simpler meal.

[gumby]

Thanks for checking this.

I have in the past complained about bugs like this to a cousin of mine who works for the BBC. The response? "Hell, we're the press; what do you expect?"

(At one point we discussed it in person and she said that she actually thinks the BBC standards are pretty high, but that's merely relatively high in an industry where the standards are low. I suppose the years have made her cynical).