Simply put, Sleepy's fell asleep at the job on this one. Regardless of the research methods, the "results" are just plain boring and inconsequential. A MONUMENTAL time difference of eleven minutes warrants a New York Times article? Seriously? I feel as though the person who pulled the trigger on this need-to-know information is the type to be glued to SportsCenter when we find out what LeBron James had for lunch on his day off.
This study was pointless. These results were pointless. This whole thing was pointless. So, logically, LET'S GO TO THE TIMES. I'd give myself a concussion if I face-palmed any harder. Again, I don't buy into the "bad press is still good press" logic. Your company being run by dunces is now the public image. In the words of Miami Heat kid... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qEsTXVj57M
The Times absolutely should have run this. In the joke section. With a disclaimer. "Sorry for wasting your time, go make fun of Sleepy's on Twitter." Sometimes it's nice of large-scale publications like the Times to make us aware of dense companies like Sleepy's so they can be mocked mercilessly with witty hashtags and banter.
No, really. The Times should have laughed in Sleepy's faces and told them to go home. This was a waste of everyone's time. I honestly cannot imagine why the NYT decided it would be a good idea to run this garbage piece. Now that they've published the article, people will assume the NYT agrees with the totally 100% accurate and not questionable research results. Being associate with this is just a bad move on their part. Someone goofed badly.
No comments:
Post a Comment