One wonders too why they held themselves back at that - surely they’d have preferred to have had the headline the other way round…
Also, when they say “asylum seekers” I think what they actually want to say is “illegal immigrants” because the latter is, um, illegal while the former are legal. But “asylum seekers” fits two decks in 72pt much neater than “illegal immigrants”. 6 units + 7 units vs 5 units and 10 units, for those who know how to do unit counts for headlines. (Every lower-case letter is 1 unit, except m which is 1.5, and i & l which are 0.5. Capitals are 1.5.)
And isn’t it enough to say “bombers are bombers”? Isn’t that far enough beyond the pale? Oh, no, because the Express isn’t as interested in getting rid of bombers as it is in getting rid of asyl… illegal immigrants.
(Oh, I took the picture in the newsagent. No way I’m going to pay for stuff like that.)
- These posts might be related (the database thinks..):
- New job, and stuff you realise (30 November 2005; score: 54.47%)
- Journalism or "churnalism"? Nick Davies of the Gdn weighs in.. (31 January 2008; score: 48.7%)
- Darwin vs Daily Express readers: die from fire, not dirty dishcloths. Not that the latter happens anyway (25 January 2007; score: 47.97%)