• Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Still poorly worded lol. When you say the width of a toothbrush, I think the width of it, not the length

    • Screwthehole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s extremely poorly worded, as the word weapon is not the same as the word shell or ammunition. In fact, that’s why we have separate words for both. I’d have thought people with English degrees (journalists still need education right?) would know these things.

      But I’m not a journalist, so I guess they know best right? 😅

      • Nepenthe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, certainly that can’t be an intentional choice. That would violate the entire oath of journalism. The people rely on them.

        • vortic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If it confused a bunch of people, I’d say it’s poorly worded. “A gun the length of a toothbrush” made me think of a small pistol not a cannon.

          • starman2112@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s because british journalists are incredibly stupid. Industry standard is to refer to weapons by their bore–you don’t call a Glock 19 a 185mm handgun, after all.