Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
If that's the impression you were left with, I can only say it wasn't intended. But the author is responsible not merely for their intentions but for making their message clear to the intended audience, regardless, so that's my bad.
Certainly, I "accepted" his invitation to mock his dad, but that was just an attention-getter, much like CP's insertion of his dad into the conversation; I "took" the invitation, but I didn't follow through. The mockery, as OBP noted, was of the article, in the form of a parody.
Veteran status isn't sufficient endorsement for an article that was blatantly misleading in its association of a punch-line quote with a well-known veteran who clearly did not deliver that quote. Doing so opens the door to criticism.
As ever, Jesse
Comment