ADVENTURES IN JOURNALISM
When you read a headline that refers to a "giant child-eating snake," you tend to assume it's referring to a snake that (a) is giant, and (b) has eaten a child.
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
First!
Posted by: Walt | March 31, 2006 at 08:55 AM
What is the Department of Sustainability?
Posted by: Walt | March 31, 2006 at 08:56 AM
"These things have been allowed to run amok in the United States...eating alligators..."? does this guy get his info from late night horror flicks or what? Oh, wait, he must read the blog. Never mind.
Posted by: artchick | March 31, 2006 at 09:02 AM
What did you think, Dave? It was a very large child engaged in snake consumption?
Posted by: The Sarcasticynic | March 31, 2006 at 09:02 AM
The snake is named for a POTENTIAL act?!?
I guess snakes are not innocent until proven guilty. Actually, I have no problem with that.
Posted by: slyeyes | March 31, 2006 at 09:04 AM
Punctuation is a wonderful thing. "Giant child, eating snake" would work well as a caption under a photo of the scenario described above by The Sarcasticynic.
Posted by: KDF | March 31, 2006 at 09:11 AM
apparently we have overloaded their server
Posted by: Angel | March 31, 2006 at 09:25 AM
It may be only a juvenile, but 2 meters long is still almost six feet of snake.
Posted by: Reine le Guin | March 31, 2006 at 09:26 AM
"almost six feet of snake."
Okay everbody - Reminds me of...
Posted by: fivver | March 31, 2006 at 09:29 AM
It's not good to be a snake with a child-eating hissssstory.
Posted by: ShadowKatmandu | March 31, 2006 at 09:29 AM
No children were eaten in the name of journalism? Drat!
Posted by: Suzy Q | March 31, 2006 at 09:30 AM
OK, it's just me
works now
Posted by: Angel | March 31, 2006 at 09:30 AM
2 meters long is still almost six feet of snake.
If by "almost", you "more than" - you are correct.
A meter is long than a yard.
But, this blog does have a policy of never letting the facts get in the way of a good comment...
Posted by: markhh | March 31, 2006 at 09:31 AM
six feet of snake? sounds like room enough to hold two children, provided they are not giants
Posted by: mathmom | March 31, 2006 at 09:35 AM
It's six feet of giant snake, for you! Not them.
Posted by: Jemmy | March 31, 2006 at 09:36 AM
Six feet of snake?
That's what they used to call me in High School.
Mind you, I was only 5'8" at the time . . .
Posted by: Sarcasmo | March 31, 2006 at 09:37 AM
So is this based on the "New Journalism"?
(I also tried to come up with a pithy and witty headline, based upon the principals of possible or potential journalism...but all I could come up with was "Woman writes pithy and witty headline".)
Arhhhgghhh Groan, I know it's really bad huh.
Posted by: LucyVanPelt | March 31, 2006 at 09:38 AM
The owners were destroyed????
Posted by: insomniac | March 31, 2006 at 09:41 AM
Awwww....c'mon....at least give the snake a CHANCE to live up to it's potential!
(It's probably already big enough to snack on the little Spears/Federline kid. What? That kid has no future anyway....)
Posted by: Punkin Poo | March 31, 2006 at 09:54 AM
Markhh -- metricism was never my strong subject. ;)
Posted by: Reine le Guin | March 31, 2006 at 10:00 AM
I think more headlines should start with possibilities instead of facts. For instance:
"Bush & Cheney caught in goat fondling scandal. "
"Canadians accidentally invade France while on European Tour"
"World accidentally destroyed by well organized roaches"
Just think of the fun we could have.
Posted by: Somewhere North | March 31, 2006 at 10:04 AM
In other news: Abnormally large serial killer found in baby's bed
Junior Brown, son of 7 foot tall Winston and 6 foot 5 inch Carla brown was found sleeping soundly in his crib. However, given the size of his parents, and the fact that he's destined to be a middle-aged white guy, he could potentially become the tallest serial killer ever.
Posted by: Sarcasmo | March 31, 2006 at 10:06 AM
2 meters is a baby Burmese python
Posted by: ASK | March 31, 2006 at 10:06 AM
"These things have run amok in the United States, killing people's pets, getting in the waterways and eating alligators in Florida's Everglades National Park.
There was one alligator incident and now they're marked for life. This is how prejudice starts.
Posted by: KOW | March 31, 2006 at 10:08 AM
"Fuzzy Bunnies set to evolve into 26 foot tall, sharp-fanged, laser-eyed man-eaters! Earth has only 23 Million Years to prepare!"
"In a related story, rabbit stew gains popularity around the globe!"
Posted by: Punkin Poo | March 31, 2006 at 10:09 AM
See, everyone loves the made up headlines. They are so much more amusing.
I really think the Aussies should be careful about labelling America as a haven for dangerous creatures given that the average housefly in Australia is deadly.
Posted by: Somewhere North | March 31, 2006 at 10:26 AM
Hey the snake choked on that alligator and died. It didn't actually eat it. The injustice!
Posted by: Edgar Greenberg | March 31, 2006 at 10:32 AM
"These things have run amok..."
Snakes got legs!
Posted by: nannie | March 31, 2006 at 10:34 AM
Ya know, I assumed they were talking about a snake that specializes in giant children
Posted by: random thunking, the | March 31, 2006 at 10:38 AM
punkin, you are so bad today! Snacking on the little Spears/Federline kid? HAHAHAHA!
Posted by: southerngirl | March 31, 2006 at 11:04 AM
I'm not bad - I'm just drawn that way.
Posted by: Punkin Poo | March 31, 2006 at 11:11 AM
Hippity hop, hippity hop BANG!!!
*snork* @ Punkin!
Posted by: KDF | March 31, 2006 at 11:11 AM
But Dave, if they had put the words capable of in the headline, it wouldn't be here, now would it?
All's well that ends well!
Posted by: Eleanor | March 31, 2006 at 12:12 PM
"Four have been found roaming free in Melbourne and the DSE fears it is only a matter of time before they run wild."
Can someone explain to me the difference between "Roaminf Free" and "Running Wild"
one other thing. I have owned both lizards and snakes. They do not spread disease like they reported.
Posted by: Some_people_juggle_geese.™ | March 31, 2006 at 12:22 PM
Darn my typo's. I need a proofreader.
Posted by: Some_people_juggle_geese.™ | March 31, 2006 at 12:25 PM
I think any one of us could be said to be "capable of eating a small child."
Though I'm not sure I could do it one sitting.
Posted by: Bill | March 31, 2006 at 12:30 PM
SPJG - wouldn't a snake be "slithering wild" as opposed to "running"?
Posted by: Reine le Guin | March 31, 2006 at 03:13 PM
That sounds much better to me Reine, but apparently the newspaper that this was in didnt care.
Posted by: S_P_J_G™ | March 31, 2006 at 04:07 PM
Now I can't punctuate either. I need a drink.
Posted by: Some_people_juggle_geese™ | March 31, 2006 at 04:08 PM
Sloppy enuf "reporting" to be denied any legitimate claim to "journalism" ...
Nah, that's all I got ... y'all took all my best lines ...
Posted by: O. the U(manity) | March 31, 2006 at 10:27 PM