Skip to main content

newsflash: this article is ridiculous in more ways than one

This article, posted by the Associate Press and MSNBC, just made me chuckle.

Aside from its obviously pointless and outlandish propogand-ish subject matter (which I won't even bother to dissect), the very first line is, at the very least, thought provokingly... ridiculous.

I'm no genius when it comes to numbers and especially fractions. So would somebody please correct me if this sentence has even a lick of of mathmatical logic? Please keep in mind, answers suggesting people in terms of fractions will not be accepted.

"NEW YORK - More than nine out of 10 Americans, men and women alike, have had premarital sex, according to a new study."

Sigh....

Rolls eyes.

Goes straight to blogger to blog about it.

Kids, read it but don't look to much into it. It's just your friendly AP at it again.

Comments

Lisa said…
Maybe saying "95 out of 100 Americans" would have been less confusing. :)
Well, there is a reason a lot of my fellow journalism students and I went into our field...avoiding math!
John H said…
to go along with Lisa and make a stupid joke all at once:

For every 100 men, 95 have been into women before marriage.

Popular posts from this blog

no pressure over capuccino

This morning, my iPod played this song for me. My iPod has been playing this for me quite frequently. Weird considering it's on 'shuffle'. For some reason, my iPod likes this song. For some reason, I like this song. I have a special affinity for songs that reference Jesus and the Bible written by people who don't profess to be Christians (another great one is Dave Matthews' "A Christmas Song"). It's always interesting to see these figures from a secular point of view. I googled the lyrics this morning, because Alanis is Canadian :-p Some of the most important words were not what I previously thought they were. And now I like it even more. Disclaimer: I don't pretend to understand this song completely (especially the origin of the title), but I really like that it makes me think. Any intuitive comments about the meaning of this song will be rewarded with great awe. Side note: all the "90's" references, I think, are meant to convey &qu

you are what you see

If you visit here regularly, you may (or may not) have noticed something. I don't blog about t.v. shows. This is because I don't really watch t.v. that much. Yes, I have one, and yes, I have cable. And yes, I do, on occasion, decide to sit down and relax by voluntarily turning off my brain and turning on that blackhole box. But I don't have a show . I don't want a show. I want to explain why. This post is dedicated to those of you out there who have a show, have too many shows, or think you need a show. And you all know I know you know who you all are... Top Ten reasons why you do not need a show: 10. You are what you see. This could be bad if you are watching - well anything. Unless you are watching your own reality t.v. show, and then that would be, just, meta - and therefore redundant, and also a little bit egomaniacal . But I digress. 9. Studies show watching teevee produces less brain activity than sleeping. It also has an adverse affect on your ability to discern

a call for linkage

Warning: I'm about to be shameless. So a lot of you know that I write for another site called About Nashville hosted by 451Press.com. My editors are running a contest for their current writers that will pay $500 to the writer that can get the most incoming links during the month of July. Every time someone you link this blog or this site from your blog or site, I become one link closer to the cash victory. What's in it for you? My undying appreciation, of course. Kidding. I will return the favor with a little link love of my own for ya. So let's get linking!! Mama needs a new pair of shoes is trying to buy her first house this year! UPDATE : if you do choose to participate, please leave a comment or send me an email so I will know about it. Right now, I'm not sure I know any other way to catch your link.