Was It, Or Wasn’t It Appropriate? 

    Once again I’m disheartened; not surprised mind you, just disheartened by the internet news. 
   One headline read - - 

 Melania’s Outfit for Joint Address Called Inappropriate 

    When that link is followed to the headline for the actual article this is what is found -

 Melania Trump's Outfit for Husband's Address to Congress Divides Internet 

    So now we have a toned-down headline. If the editor had used this second headline as his lead, he probably would not have sucked nearly as many readers into following the link in the first place. The gist of the article says, and I quote - 
    “As always, the Twitterverse had a lot to say about the first lady's style, with some saying her choice of sequins was "inappropriate" for Congress and others coming to her defense, calling her look "stunning" and "amazing." 
    So why didn’t the headline say – 

 Melania’s outfit for Joint Address Called Stunning and Amazing 

    Probably because the people editing this “news” item wanted those of us who just grab at the headlines for our knowledge of the world around us to come away with a very skewed impression, that what the First Lady wore on this occasion was so bad that it was deemed inappropriate by somebody whose opinion we didn’t care about in the first place. 
    One: the headline is just not accurately reporting of all the facts, and two: it seems to me to be petty sniping at someone, just because they’ve reached a position that this editor has no hope of ever reaching. 

    And then there was another internet news headline - 

 George Bush Shares Harsh Critisim of President Trump 

    When clicking on that link I found this sub-headline – 

 George W. Bush doesn't like the Trump-era 'racism and name-calling' 

    Well, that is quite a bit different from the first headline. The article went on to quote Bush as saying, “I don't like the racism and I don't like the name-calling and I don't like the people feeling alienated. Nobody likes that." 
    He further noted that the political climate in Washington, D.C., is "pretty ugly."     The rest of what this article reported Bush as saying was along the same line, but nowhere did he ever mention Trump or Trump-era. I guessing the editor stuck that in to one: take a jab at Trump, and two: to take a jab at Trump, because in today’s climate that seems to be the method for anybody to get noticed, who probably wouldn’t get noticed otherwise. 
    Why would this editor take a cheap shot at one President by using something that another President didn’t say? 
    One reason is that news is big business. They have to make a profit just like the pharmaceutical and oil companies. And to do that they need us, the readers, to follow those links as far as possible, because that’s where the advertisers have their ads. And if the news can’t get us to buy the sponsors’ products, those sponsors will take their advertising dollars elsewhere. That hurts the news company’s bottom line; and like I said, they have to make a profit to stay in business.