Now maybe I'm just a killjoy and maybe it's just that it's 4 in the morning and I can't sleep, but I found this article's attitude depressing. Of course people enjoy learning wacky facts about ordinary customs, but do these bits of history need to be presented in such a Nickelodeonesque fashion? Wouldn't CNN's audience benefit from a little more history and a little less being talked down to? It seems to me that the whole "people used to be so crazy/stupid!" tone of this article insults the intelligence of its readers. These wedding traditions aren't really "incredibly bizarre," as the author claims, but presenting all of pre-1950 history as a distant and unknowable shadow world is.
Also, this quote grated on my nerves:
A common theme that you've no doubt noticed throughout this post: humans used to be a superstitious bunch.
Used to be? Also, since when is it appropriate to use contractions and the second person singular when writing for a major news outlet. Perhaps CNN has decided to cede what remaining authority it once had to the blogs.
1 comment:
Worse yet, the "interesting facts" are mostly not facts at all. It seems to me that Mss Thompson just did a google search on "wedding traditions" and cited the wackiest ones she could find without regard to any source selection, or even citing. I am reminded of the once ubiquitous "Life in Shakespeare's time" email that so many people took seriously in the mid-90s. One version of this "history lesson can be found here:
http://www.fiestaturbo.com/forums/life-in-the-1500-s-vt163198/
The saddest part is how many readers will accept this balderdash as fact, since they saw it on a reputable news site, and won't even notice that CNN is posting "articles" from "mentalfloss.com."
Post a Comment