Journalism is no place for jokes. This isn’t the only ungrammatical language in the article. If they want to be taken seriously, a good proofreader is essential. Otherwise, they’ll be perceived as you suggest: a joke.
I don’t think their goal is to become the next Reuters. as far as I can tell, the articles on the website are posted by one (1) person, and they’re free to express themselves in whatever way the want.
besides, for me at least, the phrase carries a specific meaning. it’s a self-deprecating quip, an acknowledgment that what they did wasn’t some super serious journalistic work, given that it mostly comprised of sending Mozilla an email, and doesn’t warrant using something that would indicate more extensive journalistic work like “I did some digging” or “I investigated”.
That is one possible interpretation of the language. Without knowing something about the author, the blog itself could be a disinformation campaign.
Assuming it’s genuine, we agree that they have the right to say whatever they want so long as it doesn’t present a clear and present danger. And readers have the right to decide they’re wrong or uninformed.
Journalism is no place for jokes. This isn’t the only ungrammatical language in the article. If they want to be taken seriously, a good proofreader is essential. Otherwise, they’ll be perceived as you suggest: a joke.
I don’t think their goal is to become the next Reuters.
as far as I can tell, the articles on the website are posted by one (1) person, and they’re free to express themselves in whatever way the want.besides, for me at least, the phrase carries a specific meaning. it’s a self-deprecating quip, an acknowledgment that what they did wasn’t some super serious journalistic work, given that it mostly comprised of sending Mozilla an email, and doesn’t warrant using something that would indicate more extensive journalistic work like “I did some digging” or “I investigated”.
That is one possible interpretation of the language. Without knowing something about the author, the blog itself could be a disinformation campaign.
Assuming it’s genuine, we agree that they have the right to say whatever they want so long as it doesn’t present a clear and present danger. And readers have the right to decide they’re wrong or uninformed.