![]() All intelligence services just love to do that! We don't use headlines for significant content, for the reasons you mention, but we do use them to document usage, and if this was a big deal, I could dig up many RS that use that term in their content, not just their headlines, but this isn't even something we would normally source based on the history of the document and the rules for titles here. They have one on Hillary Clinton, and likely on any other high profile westerners, as well as on their own oligarchs. "Trump dossier" is also seen frequently when referring to this document, while "Russia dossier" usually refers to the dossier of kompromat on Trump held by Russian intelligence. You are the first one to ever question it, but you can't change history. There is no doubt about "Steele dossier", and there never was any doubt about the original title. After a long period of time had elapsed, the media began using "Steele dossier" more and more, so we decided to change the title. ![]() "Trump-Russia dossier" is the original title, not "Steele dossier". Tachypaidia ( talk) 20:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC) Tachypaidia: a minor point, but the normal order is with Trump first, as in Trump-Russia dossier. In any case, when the dossier is named in the Washington Post article, it's called the "Steele dossier." I suspect, like other "headline grabbers" this is put into the lede for similar effect. Headlines in journalism are often designed to catch attention, and are not substantive (often not even written by the article author). ![]() The name has no official standing, and the two sources put up for it are headlines only, not in the actual articles. The lede puts forward an alternative name for the Steele dossier, i.e., the "Russian-Trump" dossier. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |