Hacker News Reader

Comment by tgb | Hacker News Reader

"He was ... known for, among many other things, ... a performance at Super Bowl XLI in a raining downpour in front of over a hundred million people."

Typo and/or I call bullshit.

View on HN

This[1] seems to indicate viewership of the halftime show peaked at 140M.

1: https://web.archive.org/web/20090412054158/http://www.suntim...

Okay, I can see where you're coming from but the sentence was "raining downpour in front of over a hundred million people." How does that NOT imply a live audience of a hundred million? I can't believe people are downvoting me for this. The sentence is absurd as written.

Maybe because it's not the best time to nitpick about that?

ahah, always keep a scientist mind, right? that's why you downvoted :D keep it up, scientist :)

Downvotes aren't punishment. Up/down votes indicate "this comment ought to be more/less prominent on the page". The sentence was somewhat ambiguous and your misunderstanding is understandable. But your comment is not useful to the discussion because most people understood and in any case it's tangential.

Okay honestly am I the only one who reads "in front of a hundred million people" and thinks it actually means he was in front of a hundred million people? I don't see it as an ambiguity, it's simply a wrong statement. I'm okay with people being uninterested in (and even downvoting) a correction, but I'm baffled that anyone could read the sentence as anything other than incorrect. I mean, they even describe the weather of the event as if to make it sound even more impressive that all these people showed up!

during the set he performed purple rain, probably his most famous song, and it was pouring down rain. that's why the weather is notable.

a hundred million people in one venue is certainly an unbelievable number though.

I think they mentioned the weather because it's relevant to his reputation as a legendary live performer and it's part of a great story. [1] There's something almost magical about incredible live performances. I can't really describe it, but sometimes a show has the perfect mix of emotion and artistry and it's completely mesmerizing to be a part of, even as a spectator. Participating in that moment bonds millions of people together in a small way. Even if they have nothing else in common, they were able to experience that together. Prince's Superbowl performance was one of those moments.

[1] http://www.maxim.com/entertainment/prince-2007-super-bowl-pe...

It's a poorly written sentence, but it's also fairly clear what they meant to say. It's polite to give people the benefit of the doubt.

I've reworded the sentence in the post—does it work better that way? Many thanks for the feedback, everyone. :-)

Thanks, I really do appreciate it. The thought that it could have meant televised audience never crossed my mind and surely wouldn't have for some other portion of the audience as well. I was out googling for largest concert size records to make sure I wasn't crazy.

That's actually spot on if you count the TV viewing audience - 112M people as of the 2014 event.

That presumably includes the television audience.

I would assume they are including the tv audience as well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com