this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
30 points (100.0% liked)
World News
32269 readers
515 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel like this title is intentionally misleading, probably trying to draw parallels to the defacing of Stonehenge with orange powder.
They put orange high-vis vests on the statues. No damage was caused.
Damage by fossil fuels vs. damage by Just Stop Oil.
I feel it, but at the same time, where does the title imply the statues were damaged? It's all about grabbing attention in order to bring focus to the disastrous situation we're in with our environment.
Giving the statues "an orange makeover" implies something a lot more permanent or at least harder to remove than high-vis vests. If someone tells you they "got a makeover", when in reality what they did was change their shirt, would you not think that was a little disingenuous?
I'm not being critical of you, or the protest, to be clear, I just think the title is a poor representation of what happened.
Guess it all comes down to your definition of makeover. In looking up the definition, it's defined as "a radical change in appearance, it may imply a change in clothing, haircut, or cosmetics". This being the case, I'd say the title's spot on. But it all comes down to how you define makeover regarding if the titles misleading. It's a bit ambiguous, so I see what you're saying.
there's an accompanying photo....