The Wall Street Journal story is interesting: Monster Cable Products Inc. is all but suing the Monsters™ under your bed for calling themselves Monsters™.
But this paragraph drives me to distraction:
Occasionally, Monster Cable has retreated. After it sued MonsterVintage LLC, an online used-clothing store based in Oregon, owner Victor Petrucci says he drove a rented truck to Monster Cable's headquarters and around San Francisco for two weeks. It was emblazoned with a giant sign that read in part, "Monster Cable S-." Monster Cable dropped the lawsuit.
I'm sorry. . . a sign that read, in part, "Monster Cable S-."?
What did the other part read? "Hi, My name is Victor Petrucci. Excuse me for the intrusion, but I am tooling around San Francisco in this rented truck, which has been emblazoned with a giant sign and my giant signs reads, in full, 'Monster Cable S-"
Was that the full text of the sign?
Or wait. Was it the letters that might come after S? Is that what has been redacted here?
Even contemplating that makes me slightly faint. I'm fanning myself repeatedly to quell my Victorian-era hysteria.
This is a particularly ham-handed example of an alrea-y ridiculous pr-nt media conven-ion.
It sucks.
See what I did there?