News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Sell your poop for $13,000 per year. Parent comment

Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by stefantalpalaru on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @08:17AM (#8990119)
Why should "feces" be used only in scientific journals?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by dignati on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @08:21AM (#8990133)
"fecal matter" is used later in the article. They probably just used "poop" in the title to catch more eyes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by mattdotc on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @10:24AM (#8990821)
Astute observation. Much care is taken when writing headlines and in the case of news organizations with print editions in addition to their web presence, the web headline isn't necessarily the same as what runs in print because of different concerns, e.g. SEO vs journalistic standards.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by DonHopkins on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @10:07AM (#8990693)
It was a "Poop Culture" article.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by skierscott on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @08:50AM (#8990254)
And more clicks.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Sell your poop for $13,000 per year by josefresco on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @10:41AM (#8990931)
I'm not saying they should - my point was that you shouldn't expect "scientific" terminology and language from the Washington Post.
[ Parent | on HN ]