Headline of the Day?

Someone left their used newspaper on the kitchen table at work. The pages were all disheveled but I caught this headline poking out from the middle of the pile:

"Studies show America goes crazy for studies"

This reminded me of lots of jokes, like the one about how "90% of all the statistics you hear are made up," which, of course, is itself a made-up statistic. The Family Guy parodied this entire concept in a skit where Peter tells Chris: "Chris, everything I say is a lie. Except that. And that. And that. And that. And that..."

Anyway, apparently the printed article's headline was a lie too. I looked for it online just so I could post a hyperlink to it here. I typed it into google but found nothing. Then I went to the source's website only to discover that the online version of the article had a completely different headline than the paper version. The new/online headline was:

"Churchgoing and obesity"

This was quite moderately funny to me as well because the article included two annectodes of the types of "ridiculous-sounding studies" on inane topics (e.g., "why [do] bees buzz") that Americans and late-night comics love to cite. One such study involved investigating the effects of sword-swallowing on the human throat. The other found a weak link between church attendance among young adults and obesity later in life. The article stated that the church-obesity study "got a lot of play in the media, leading to all sorts of cute headlines: 'Is Church Bad for Your Health?' 'Is Faith Fattening?' 'Thou Shalt Be Overweight!'"

Well, apparently someone at the newspaper's website decided that the original headline for the article, which was both funny and representative of the author's point, wasn't eye-catching, or SEO-driving, enough. So the original headline was replaced with the exact type of sensationalist and misleading headline that the article's author was mocking. Actually, it was nearly identical to the examples of "cute" (i.e., misleading) headlines about the church-obesity study that the article quoted. Although I have no real understanding of what the term "meta" means, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this whole thing is quite "meta."

Still, news articles and stories with purposely misleading headlines bother me. Family Guy took a swipe at this type of sensationalist news reporting as well when Tom Tucker, the local news anchor, says immediately prior to a commercial break: "Coming up next. Can bees think?" After a brief pause, but still before the commercial break arrives, he dourly reveals: "A new study indicates that no, they cannot." Ha!

Lawsuit of Interest

Fired Woman Denies CEO's Claim That "Hostile" Fetus Had A "Negative Agenda"

In the CEO's defense, the woman is named "Harms"...

Seriously?

In an article about antibiotic use in farm animals leading to resistant diseases in humans who eat the meat of those animals, there is a focus on farmer Rowles and his PIG farm.

According to the article, Farmer Rowles believes that he practices safe antibiotic adminstration that does not lead to sickness in humans:

"[Farmer] Rowles gives his pigs virginiamycin, which has been used in livestock for decades and is not absorbed by the gut. He withdraws the drug three weeks before his hogs are sent for slaughter. He also monitors his herd for signs of drug resistance to ensure they are getting the most effective doses." (My emphasis).

"The one thing that the American public wants to know is: Is the product that I'm getting, is it safe to eat?" said Rowles, whose home freezer is full of his pork. "I'm telling you that the product that we produce today is the safest, most wholesome product that you could possibly get."

Someone in Congress disagrees. That someone is SERGEANT SLAUGHTER! No, actually it is just Rep. Louise M. Slaughter [whoops, sorry], D-N.Y., who has proposed a bill to outlaw the practice of feeding antibiotics to healthy livestock:

According to Slaughter: "If you mixed an antibiotic in your child's cereal, people would think you're crazy."

WHAT are the odds that someone named Slaughter would stand opposed to a bunch of pig farmers in this debate?

As it turns out, not all farmers are in opposition to Slaughter...PUN INTENDED:

"Back in Missouri, farmer Kremer [a different farmer who was accidentally gored by an antibiotic resistant bore on his farm] finally found an antibiotic that worked on his leg. After being released from the hospital, Kremer tested his pigs. The results showed they were resistant to all the same drugs he was. Kremer tossed his hypodermic needles, sacked his buckets of antibiotic-laced feed, slaughtered his herd and started anew [without using antibiotics on his animals]." (My emphasis).

I guess it is fitting that the pig slaughterer and Slaughter are fighting on the same team now.

Video Headline of the Week

Via CNN.com iReports: Giant puppets for German unity (that's the headline from the CNN.com main page, but not the title of the video, which is "Berlin Unification Day - Giant Puppets").

Anything about "Giant puppets" is cool. This gets even cooler because it lists "giant puppets" on the same line as something serious: German unity. It would be even better to see a headline where the giant puppets are actually doing something serious, like: "Giant puppets protest anti-abortion bill in front of Whitehouse."

Who Said Tweeting About Sleeping In A Moldy Apartment Was Bad For You?

Thank goodness for Twitter. Without it, attorneys might run out of people to sue…oh wait…that’s what I do for a living…forget my sarcasm then…

Worst Simile Ever?

"Then reality hits you like bird poop falling on a shady park bench."

Wow. Was this intentionally terrible...used as a quasi-joke, or what?

I have no further comment.

Another Excellent Headline

"Meat for monkey sex?"

Best quote: "And in this primitive style of wine-and-dine, it turns out the more meat you share, the more sex you get in return." (Emphasis added).

I would say that is probably a truism.
How are you supposed to even have sex if you aren't "sharing your meat"... (and don't bother trying to answer that question, it has already been "resolved").