"Elon Musk kind of turned out to be an asshole and I don't want to be driving a car built and designed by an asshole. So, uh, looking forward to my new ride."
Such a strange sentence. Makes you “garden path” (reanalyze the syntax after already being deeper into the structure). Minimally need a “that” after “Senator”.
Though it’s uncommon usage, so that’s actually a tick against it potentially being AI generated.
I’ve never heard of the site Mediaite before. I didn’t click the link, but plenty of AI slop sites are popping up and headlines like this are a good way to spot them.
EDIT: apparently the sites been around for a bit, and this seems to be a one off headline issue. The credited writer appears to have several articles without issues apparent at first glance. Another article says “White House attorney” but it’s an attorney that’s acting as a liaison. Maybe just a nitpick. Some sensationalist headlines. Same as I’ve seen elsewhere so nothing too egregious.
Thank you for the link! Will edit my comment to reflect it’s not new. It seems there’s some question as to its journalistic merit with the wiki stating “The New York Times has described the site as “a blog that chronicles the gossipy media world””, but it seems it’s been around for a bit at least.
“Senator Elon Musk” is ambiguous phrasing. Obviously, what is meant is “Senator [that] Elon Musk”, but it could also have been calling Aparthiedman himself a senator.
What a misleading and poorly written headline.
Such a strange sentence. Makes you “garden path” (reanalyze the syntax after already being deeper into the structure). Minimally need a “that” after “Senator”.
Though it’s uncommon usage, so that’s actually a tick against it potentially being AI generated.
You mean ‘who’, right? Senators are (usually bad) people so let’s not treat them like objects.
“That” or “who” are both commonly used for animate arguments. And given it is an object here, “whom” would be the most pretentious option.
I’ve never heard of the site Mediaite before. I didn’t click the link, but plenty of AI slop sites are popping up and headlines like this are a good way to spot them.
EDIT: apparently the sites been around for a bit, and this seems to be a one off headline issue. The credited writer appears to have several articles without issues apparent at first glance. Another article says “White House attorney” but it’s an attorney that’s acting as a liaison. Maybe just a nitpick. Some sensationalist headlines. Same as I’ve seen elsewhere so nothing too egregious.
Mediaite has been around for 15 years https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediaite
Thank you for the link! Will edit my comment to reflect it’s not new. It seems there’s some question as to its journalistic merit with the wiki stating “The New York Times has described the site as “a blog that chronicles the gossipy media world””, but it seems it’s been around for a bit at least.
Its owned by Daniel Abrams, the guy who created Live PD and its spiritual successor, On Patrol: Live.
Wait, I read the article and the headline is pretty much on point? What am I missing?
“Senator Elon Musk” is ambiguous phrasing. Obviously, what is meant is “Senator [that] Elon Musk”, but it could also have been calling Aparthiedman himself a senator.
It reads like a gardenpath sentence.
For example (made up on the spot so excuse me if its crap)
Muscle man made harms others when using force
[Muscle that was made by man]
I like “The old man the ship”
Elon Musk isn’t a Senator. The title as written reads that way by default.
A
thatshoved in the middle would fix that.This sounds like Elon is a Senator and was called a traitor; when it was actually Musk calling a Senator a traitor.
Try: