SITE CONTENTS.

Filler 62%
Deliberate falsehoods 23%
Ambiguities 14%
Errata 9%
Misinterpretations 7%
Libel 3%
Weather 2%
Rhyme 1.5%
Reason 1.2%
Sophisticated humor 0.7%
Implausible statistics 561%

—

. 11 comments.

Comments

  1. RepubAnon says:
    October 9, 2013 at 11:28 pm

    Wow, this site gives 684%! That’s great effort!

    Reply
  2. RepubAnon says:
    October 9, 2013 at 11:29 pm

    Well, actually 684.4%… but, hey, who counts?

    Reply
  3. David Poecking says:
    October 10, 2013 at 6:57 am

    Does this site contain no due diligence? Doesn’t that mean the site makes you vulnerable to civil action? And speaking of due diligence, ought you not post margins of error with your statistics?

    Reply
  4. Clay Potts says:
    October 10, 2013 at 8:27 am

    So, here is case of art imitating science…

    Reply
  5. Dr. Boli says:
    October 10, 2013 at 9:03 am

    A candid look at the site would suggest that it does not even contain undue diligence.

    Reply
  6. Dr. Boli says:
    October 10, 2013 at 9:06 am

    Although building a table with raw HTML code is not as easy as it looks.

    Reply
  7. Clay Potts says:
    October 10, 2013 at 10:25 am

    A brilliant sage once stated (about 15 seconds ago), “building character is much like building a table. If not properly constructed, it will collapse under the slightest weight”.

    Reply
  8. Jared says:
    October 10, 2013 at 12:51 pm

    Those are dangerously high levels of sophisticated humor, which is known to the state of California to cause insufferableness.

    Reply
  9. C. Simon says:
    October 10, 2013 at 5:46 pm

    These categories are not mutually exclusive.

    For starters, I’d say that 0.3% of content is sophisticated humor AND libel. The more libelous, the funnier.

    There are whole other categories that did not make it in the table, because they are just subsets of other categories. What I mean is, 215% of content is English of the Future, but there is no need to say so, since it has already been counted as Filler + Ambiguities + Implausibility.

    Reply
  10. C. Simon says:
    October 10, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    By the way, what site are we talking about? I assumed it was CNN Headline News.

    Reply
  11. C. Simon says:
    October 10, 2013 at 6:00 pm

    No wait, now I’m sure this is the content breakdown of healthcare dot gov.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *