To people reading CNBC, it isn’t. They write for their audience, it’s in the second sentence of the article you didn’t read (“1.6%”; if you want to consume the news as a series of disconnected headlines, that’s your fault and problem), and it’s extremely easy to translate to a percentage.
I swear sometimes people on link aggregators like Lemmy and Reddit act like those boomers who perplexedly review services they’ve never used as though they think everything they see on the Internet must be personally targeted at them.
I swear sometimes people on link aggregators like Lemmy and Reddit act like those boomers who perplexedly review services they’ve never used as though they think everything they see on the Internet must be personally targeted at them.
Plenty of people do want to read about financial news, namely about why the ticker changed and its possible effects. If you don’t, that’s fine. Just check Yahoo! Finance or whatever for the ticker. Or don’t. It’s your life. But nobody has to or should accommodate your utter disinterest in reading anything past the headline.
To people reading CNBC, it isn’t. They write for their audience, it’s in the second sentence of the article you didn’t read (“1.6%”; if you want to consume the news as a series of disconnected headlines, that’s your fault and problem), and it’s extremely easy to translate to a percentage.
I swear sometimes people on link aggregators like Lemmy and Reddit act like those boomers who perplexedly review services they’ve never used as though they think everything they see on the Internet must be personally targeted at them.
Why the fuck would I read an article about a change in a ticker?
Plenty of people do want to read about financial news, namely about why the ticker changed and its possible effects. If you don’t, that’s fine. Just check Yahoo! Finance or whatever for the ticker. Or don’t. It’s your life. But nobody has to or should accommodate your utter disinterest in reading anything past the headline.