Text is a poor medium for conveying sarcasm. Missing intonation, facial expression of the speaker, etc. I run into that at work a lot. Humor is lost in texts and emails.
You can add intonation through choice of words, which is important for any written work.
The problem with work emails is when you and your peers want to / are expected to remain professional, so you use a more professional tone conveyance through text with less nonsense.
For me, I read the subtext ("He uncovered and released information that the political establishment and government wanted to stay hidden", which has a linguistic slant against the political establishment) and came to the conclusion that it was sarcasm, then I looked at the name.
There are additional clues within the greater post of subtext, as the entire point is that Assange isn't a journalist because today's journalists don't uncover things the government wants to keep hidden.
Hey, it's only partially their fault; we're pretty much full-bore clown world, so not much is outside of the realm of possibility (stupidity & evil, rather)......
Plus, I'm still not 100% sure whether this is sarcasm or not, because there absolutely ARE 'people" out there who unironically, un-sarcastically agree with this......
I usually just read through some of their old posts if I'm not sure it's sarcasm or not. If what they're saying goes against their previous stances, it's a good indication it's sarcasm.
But yeah, I get what you're saying and sometimes you just can't tell.
🤦♀️ This is why I put "/s" after anything sarcastic I say. Some people are just unable to detect sarcasm.
Well, now I feel like an asshole. Because that's definitely true, and I should have thought about it. ✌️
Kek
Don't feel like the Lone Ranger LOL
Text is a poor medium for conveying sarcasm. Missing intonation, facial expression of the speaker, etc. I run into that at work a lot. Humor is lost in texts and emails.
Everyone is on the Autism Spectrum
He’s speaking to his audience. They get it.
You can add intonation through choice of words, which is important for any written work.
The problem with work emails is when you and your peers want to / are expected to remain professional, so you use a more professional tone conveyance through text with less nonsense.
For me, I read the subtext ("He uncovered and released information that the political establishment and government wanted to stay hidden", which has a linguistic slant against the political establishment) and came to the conclusion that it was sarcasm, then I looked at the name.
There are additional clues within the greater post of subtext, as the entire point is that Assange isn't a journalist because today's journalists don't uncover things the government wants to keep hidden.
Yeah if you have previous experience with Michael Malice you're used to this sort of sarcasm from him.
I got it because of two juxtaposed concepts.
He actually described what a journalist is suppose to be and
Asked the question in such a way as to come across as sarcastic.
Didn't really need the /s
Defense mechanism to bypass HR🤣👍🏻
Indeed
So do dumbasses
Nope, not autistic, just a dumbass.
Sheldon, is that you?
Hey, it's only partially their fault; we're pretty much full-bore clown world, so not much is outside of the realm of possibility (stupidity & evil, rather)......
Plus, I'm still not 100% sure whether this is sarcasm or not, because there absolutely ARE 'people" out there who unironically, un-sarcastically agree with this......
I usually just read through some of their old posts if I'm not sure it's sarcasm or not. If what they're saying goes against their previous stances, it's a good indication it's sarcasm.
But yeah, I get what you're saying and sometimes you just can't tell.
Honk.
It's sarcasm.
"political establishment"
The only good thing reddit did for society.
He just worded it really well, and this is indeed clown world. 😂