After reading this I was not only a bit disturbed (lipsticks on pigs?) but also worried for the level of quality that the Tribune has usually held. This is a widely circulated newspaper which people trust for their news on the election and the world's affairs in general. I understand that newspapers have a variety of articles, heavy to light, but this article just seemed downright silly. I don't know about the rest of the readers, but while reading about which underwater animals would be best suited for lipstick was entertaining, I don't really feel that I came away with anything substantial. I would much rather have had an article that had real information on the election, not on the makeup tendencies of animals.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Which lipstick color do pigs prefer?
I recently read an article in the Chicago Tribune that described the ludicrous scene of presidential candidates putting make-up on pigs, following it up with an advertisement for other animals as well. If they will put lipstick on a pig, why not a chicken? It then went to go on and quote interviews with establishments such as the Lincoln Park Zoo, displaying their answers to whether or not it is wrong for the candidates to only put lipstick on pigs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The occasional moment of levity, especially in the often grim reality our news faces today, can be refreshing.
It can remind readers that the editors at dateline publications are not always self-important crusaders of a mission the general public may or may note be tuning into.
Here is another example of that levity, lipstick and all:
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2008/09/22/080922sh_shouts_saunders
On an entirely different note, I really need to learn hypertext.
Post a Comment