Why? The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
Why do you believe the gender and age were included in the article?
Honestly, no idea. To me it’s irrelevant to the story of the couple and the policy. It doesn’t matter if they were a man or a woman, young or old. It’s also irrelevant what their height and weight are, their favourite food or sports are.
The only issue here is that you’re upset the author hasn’t mentioned why the immigrant entered the country even though that’s not the point of the article. You’re the one with the issue.
LOL, it would have changed the article.
Why? The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
Why do you believe the gender and age were included in the article?
What would it have changed about it if they weren’t included and it just said “an immigrant”?
You didn’t answer my question.
Honestly, no idea. To me it’s irrelevant to the story of the couple and the policy. It doesn’t matter if they were a man or a woman, young or old. It’s also irrelevant what their height and weight are, their favourite food or sports are.
Now you answer my question.
I think that’s the crux of the issue. You’ve conflated your interests and the author’s purposes.
The only issue here is that you’re upset the author hasn’t mentioned why the immigrant entered the country even though that’s not the point of the article. You’re the one with the issue.
Now answer my question.