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.
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 suppose I wouldn't blame people for not always catching context or subtext in a post.
Sometimes we just want to tune out and take some things at face value because things are rarely as it appears anymore.
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