I still think there are different standards for filler words during conversations and titles in writing. In this case, the post title is simply a lie.
For example:
Title: Florida Man Actually has Three Legs.
Content: guy’s got such a big dick, he’s practically a tripod.
In this case, that’s a misleading title.
Edit: I also wanted to add that a title is parsed on its own, without context. Of course, “literally” can mean “not literally”, but one needs context to figure that out. In this title, such context is not there.
Oh I’m with you, but I stopped fighting for the word “literally” when the damn dictionaries gave up and added shit like this:
So literally is literally when not literally now?
Literally.
Alas, it is a mere emphasis modifier.
I still think there are different standards for filler words during conversations and titles in writing. In this case, the post title is simply a lie. For example:
Title: Florida Man Actually has Three Legs.
Content: guy’s got such a big dick, he’s practically a tripod.
In this case, that’s a misleading title.
Edit: I also wanted to add that a title is parsed on its own, without context. Of course, “literally” can mean “not literally”, but one needs context to figure that out. In this title, such context is not there.
That other guys link says they did that over a hundred years ago.
But I guess that was just for the unabridged dictionary.