(no subject)

Friday, May 22nd, 2009 11:12 am
caddyman: (Morning!)
[personal profile] caddyman
In the news today we hear that BA (British Airways) announced the biggest loss since the company was privatised in 1987.

BA reported a loss before tax of £401m for the year to 31 March, after seeing its results hit by a weak pound and higher fuel costs.

This is to be expected, I guess, in the current economic climate. The bit that worried me, though, was less the news and more the headline (which has since changed, so there's no point linking to it): BA profits nose dive.

Is it just me, or are the words nose dive particularly worrying when used in an article about a national (or indeed any) airline?

(no subject)

Date: 2009-05-22 10:25 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] invisible-al.livejournal.com
Sub-editors live for days when they can write headlines like that :).

(no subject)

Date: 2009-05-22 10:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] w00hoo.livejournal.com
Crash and Burn might have been pushing things a bit, but I don't think that 'nose dive' is that offensive myself.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-05-22 10:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] caddyman.livejournal.com
I don't think it was offensive; just an unfortunate juxtaposition of images.

(no subject)

Date: 2009-05-22 10:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] w00hoo.livejournal.com
OK, offensive was the wrong phrase. Not out of place, in no way a surprise for a news byline. Remember airplanes can go down as well as up :-)

Profile

caddyman: (Default)
caddyman

April 2023

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
1617 1819202122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags