
Rejected for a Job at the Container Store - juanplusjuan
http://www.cafe.com/r/d3eaa9d3-1e95-4818-9090-a524b87a66cc/1/the-illusion-of-control-or-how-i-got-rejected-from-a-job-at-the-container-store
======
kazinator
> _Because seriously, if an Emmy-award winning, New York Times bestselling
> author and Harvard grad cannot land a job as a greeter at The Container
> Store—or anywhere else for that matter, hard as I tried—we are all doomed._

If she actually put "Emmy-award winning, New York Times bestselling author and
Harvard grad", of course it was rejected. Such an application is
overqualified, and it looks strange that someone who actually has those
credentials would want to do something like that.

If she didn't put that on the application, then it is not intellectually
honest to say that an "Emmy-award winning, New York Times bestselling author
and Harvard grad" was rejected. The person that was rejected was the character
that is described in the job application, not the author who is hiding behind
that character!

The people doing the hiring for this type of greet-the-public job are usually
looking for "fresh faces" who project a certain image, which means, of course,
that the jobs tend to go to attractive young people. Nobody cares about your
bestselling writing, Harvard degree or Emmy award: unless perhaps the latter
is in an "Oustanding Lead/Supporting Actor in ..." category because then, doh,
you're actually famous, in the sense that random people in the public
recognize your face!

~~~
jeffreyrogers
The point is more that she exhausted her other opportunities and The Container
Store was a last resort.

~~~
kazinator
That it is a last resort is just writer's hyperbole. Why, the true last
resorts are activities like driving taxicabs, or putting up drywall (or
painting it).

~~~
smoyer
Hmmm ... the true last resort is living on the street and dying of hunger and
exposure. But it occurs to me that this is the modern version of Steinbeck's
"Grapes of Wrath". Truly desperate people will try a lot more than just
applying to the container store.

------
steven777400
Articles like this seem to be among the best ammo to support single-payer
healthcare and a basic income for all adult citizens. In addition to shielding
workers from harm due to business changes, this would also enable more
entrepreneurship since the risk of failure would be much lower for people
starting new businesses. Small businesses would also be more enticing to work
for, since they wouldn't need to directly provide health insurance and the
specter of the business folding wouldn't be as much of a concern.

~~~
zo1
"a basic income for all adult citizens. [..]shielding workers from harm due to
business changes"

As I read that, I agree with you... Until I realize you meant that to be
provided for by others via taxes. Now, I understand the compulsion to protect
everyone in the name of some social good, at the very least the "not as
fortune as me-group".

But why are we removing the need/worry for individuals to do this for
themselves? I say this because I know for a fact that this is achievable for
individuals (even poor ones). For a quite-honestly, tiny-fraction of my
salary, I get all sorts of income-protection. Due to illness, terminal
disease, disability, everything. Add on top of that life-insurance for my
family to pay off the loan-amount on the mortgage and have them covered till
my child is reasonably on his way to college, if I should leave them early.

These aren't some pipe-dream schemes or ideas, they exist. And people can get
them, without the need to beg some "noble" politician to give it to them for
free in return for votes/power.

~~~
manicdee
Your privilege is showing.

Specifically, you are on a high enough income that you aren't worrying about
food, much less mortgage repayments, job stability, whether you can afford
fuel for the car this week, or whether you need to just rinse clothes in water
to save the money you would have spent on detergent for more important things
like food, rent, or bus tickets.

There are also pele out there who won't miss another $100k in taxes. Their
worries are along the lines of "how can I make all my money work for me
without swamping any single market?"

Taxation and social welfare is just the modern version of "feed your slaves."
You should be happy to provide universal health care and subsistence income in
order to ensure your future workforce is healthy, educated and stress-free. We
treat our racing horses better than this.

~~~
briandear
Everyone should pay the exact same tax rate. The confiscatory, class-envy
based taxation is unfair and unjust. If I make more, I pay more. I shouldn't
have to pay a higher percentage. How is that fair? What right do you have to
determine if someone 'needs' their money or not? This is America.

Besides, if that woman were truly destitute, she could have gotten Medicaid.
We already fund programs for the truly poor.

Let's say you make $100k per year. Why don't you pay $80k to the government. I
don't think you need that extra money right? After all, your take home pay
would still be above minimum wage. Better yet, you really only need a studio
apartment, you don't actually need a bedroom.

Just as I have no idea about your life, how can you presume to know anything
about everyone else's?

If we taxed the 'rich' at 100%, it wouldn't even pay the federal budget for
one year.

We don't need fewer people paying more taxes. We need more people paying tax.

~~~
manicdee
Your absurd idea of an 80% tax rate would never fly. People who won't miss
another $200k a year in taxes are the ones already minimising their taxes to
the point they are only paying a half million or so.

The wealth is concentrated into the hands of a few. Higher tax rates for
higher incomes makes perfect sense when basing "far" on "ability to cope with
the loss".

20% of a low- to middle-income salary is a far greater burden than a 40% tax
on someone with an income exceeding $400k.

There is an old saying in my social circles: follow the money. If you want to
make money, you arrange to take it from the people with the money. Luxury
cars, luxury apartments, gastronomic restaurants, and so forth.

Why not tax these people more? They aren't actually going to miss the money,
and ensuring that there are more healthy middle class folks with disposable
incomes will actually help the rich get richer still.

Social welfare and a universal single-payer health care system is actually a
grand firm of corporate welfare. Throw a living wage into the mix and you can
reduce minimum wages to zero. How much better will the outlook be for
entrepreneurs and startups in that environment? No longer will volunteer
internships be exploitation, no longer will labour costs factor into viability
of a business, and you will have many more consumers with spare change to
serve.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Well... not everybody bases "fair" on "ability to cope with the loss" so
higher tax rates for higher incomes does not make perfect sense. Wouldn't it
be better to tax everyone at 20% and then let people volunteer to pay 30% if
they want to help cover those that can't afford the 20%. This way everybody
wins. Right now we generally have a large group of people that gets together
and says, "We really need to help those poor people. And _that_ guy over there
is going to pay for it." It is super easy to vote for higher taxes for someone
else. I'm curious just how many people would just volunteer to pay more than
the 20%. How do those people feel now that the only person they can point to
is themself.

------
DavidAdams
This article brings up a very important point that I don't think the author
intended to make: do not sign up for COBRA. If the author had signed up for an
individual plan under Obamacare within the 60 day period from when she lost
her job, she would have at least had health insurance, and if she remained
unemployed, she would qualify for increasingly large subsidies.

In the olden days (before 2013) you had to sign up for COBRA to stay insured
unless you were healthy enough to qualify for individual insurance. But now
you can't be turned down, but you can only sign up during specific enrollment
periods. Problem is, COBRA is still around, and companies are still required
to offer it to you, even though for most people it's going to be way more
expensive than individual insurance (because it's unsubsidized), and if
something goes wrong or you become unable to afford the premiums, you can end
up like the author, unable to sign up for an individual plan because you're
out of the enrollment period.

This is one of a few holes and pitfalls that were created by the Affordable
Care Act.

I know a lot about this stuff because my startup helps companies save money
and design health benefits programs that take advantage of recent changes in
the health care law (benefitter.com). If you have any Obamacare questions, let
me know.

~~~
wspeirs
You can also retroactively sign up for COBRA. That's what I did when I left my
job; went "uninsured" for 60 days then got my own insurance. In that 60 day
window if something had happened, I would have retroactively signed up for
COBRA (having to pay both months) and used the coverage. It's certainly a
roll-of-the-dice, but for a younger healthy person like myself, I was really
only worried about freak accidents and needed the money.

~~~
numlocked
I did the same thing. I had the paperwork filled out and the check ready to
go. Then I told a family member where it physically was in my apartment. In
the off chance I did actually get hit by a bus and hospitalized -- at least
someone could get the paperwork turned it for me.

I felt sort of silly doing it, but realized that if I really was mostly
worried about some kind of freak accident, then i should actually ensure that
the insurance could kick in following said freak accident.

------
mmanfrin
I don't understand how the Container Store fits in to this story, other than
the fact that she was denied a job. Also, I disagree with this:

    
    
      Because seriously, if an Emmy-award winning, New York Times bestselling author and Harvard grad cannot land
      a job as a greeter at The Container Store—or anywhere else for that matter, hard as I tried—we are all doomed.
    

Being an author does not qualify you to work in Loss Prevention. It may, as
gdilla pointed out in another comment, even make you overqualified for the
position.

I sympathize with the author, and I think there is a compelling story here
about healthcare, but the title undermines it severely by making it about how
she failed one attempt to get an entry-level job; and it almost feels like a
form of blackmail: The Container Store now has to deal with this widely-shared
article about how they didn't give a poor, cancer-having mother a small little
job.

~~~
dkrich
I agree. Given the fact that she mentioned multiple times trying to sell a
novel and a tv pilot, I doubt that this was an earnest attempt to get a job,
but rather an earnest attempt to get fodder for an overly-complicated article
about being rejected from a menial job at the expense of somebody else (The
Container Store).

For all we know, they rejected her to give somebody who didn't have a Harvard
degree a chance to earn some income.

~~~
DavidAdams
I don't think it was about the article. It was an attempt to get a job with
health insurance because she messed up her health insurance situation after
she lost her previous job.

~~~
sanderjd
It may be technically true that "she messed up her health insurance", but note
how easy it was to do that while believing she was doing the right thing.
Using some programming parlance, the system did a terrible job of "making
invalid states unrepresentable".

------
ja27
If you think that having an Emmy, degree from Harvard, and a slot on the NYT
best-seller list makes you any more qualified for a job at the Container Store
than a 19 year old high school dropout with 2 years of McJob experience, you
might be a classist.

~~~
crpatino
Agreed. College educated people tend to never think much about the
overwhelming amount of tacit knowledge needed for less prestigious and
apparently simple jobs.

Still, I can feel the pain of the author, having gone through several months
of unemployment at the beginning of my marriage. You did everything the elders
told you to do, and still you end up getting the short stick and thrown to the
sidewalk. I was able to pivot my career and bounce back, in part due to being
still youngish... in part thanks to the support of my family. But I can
clearly see what a shipwreck that would have been 20 years later, minus a
spouse and plus a couple of teenager kids.

------
DMac87
This rung a bell - the Container Store pays its retail workers extremely well
(at least if you believe their numbers):
[http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/10/three-equals-one-
contain...](http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/10/three-equals-one-container-
stores-50000-sales-staffer/)

If they're really investing a lot in their workers, then they want a perfect
fit or ideal type of background. If they believed the writer was a risk to
pack up and leave a year down the road, it makes sense that they wouldn't take
that risk...

------
JonFish85
"For years we Americans have been fed the convenient lie: study hard, work
hard in your chosen field, work hard at your marriage, save money, organize
your flour, salt, and sugar into labeled bins, and you will be in control of
your life and your destiny."

I'm officially starting to get sick of hearing this. Yes, it's an interesting
story, and yes, US Healthcare is in need of some serious fixing, whatever that
may mean to you.

But nobody ever guaranteed that you'll be in control of your life and your
destiny. Freak things happen; life isn't fair. All of these things (work hard,
save, study, etc.) are good to teach kids, because it increases the odds of
being in control of your own destiny. But that's it--it tilts the odds
slightly in your favor.

What else would you rather teach your kids? The author mentions her own child
is paying his/her way through college. Is that a bad thing? If higher
education is a part of this "convenient lie", perhaps you should tell your
child: it doesn't matter if you study hard or work hard--just sit back and
wait for things to happen.

Perhaps sitting down and talking with her children about career paths. No one
ever guaranteed that she'd be financially independent regardless of what she
chose for work (that I know of, anyways). If she chose to go into a field that
she LOVES, but that doesn't pay much, she needs to be aware of that. Writing
is a difficult field, I am sure. And yes, doing what you love is important,
but so is being able to do the things outside of work that you love.

The article talks about "massive nooses of debt" that affect the economy.
Nobody forced her child to go to a college where he/she had to take out
massive loans. State schools are excellent choices! Outside of the top 10-ish
in the country, I'd be surprised if the higher-cost schools are "worth" their
cost. Talk to your children about their college choices!

Yes, there are things that need to be addressed about our economy. Yes, our
healthcare system is in a bad state. But I am sick & tired of hearing people
blaming the lie that "some anonymous person/society told me to work hard and
study hard, but now I'm not where I want to be--it must be society's fault".
She had to downsize your apartment, she can't pay for her child's college. So
what? Is that society's fault?

~~~
a_c_s
You miss the point: most people think America is a place where hard work and
education allows somebody to achieve a middle class lifestyle (aka the
American Dream).

Following from this, here's the key point: most Americans want to live in such
a society where the American dream is achievable.

~~~
JonFish85
And, for the most part, that is true is it not? The author had to downsize her
apartment and couldn't afford to pay for her child's school, but overall it
sounds like she is comfortably middle class.

------
peterwwillis
I really don't understand how this got to the front of HN, but okay, i'll
bite:

Articles like this make me ashamed to live in a country where we have so much,
and yet feel the need to complain when things don't go exactly our way. As if
the world owes you a lack of breast cancer, or a stable marriage, or a steady,
decent job.

Ask the migrant worker who's here illegally, far from his family, who works a
soul-crushing routine, saving pennies to send home, with no visible end in
sight, with absolutely no form of health care, with virtually no rights as a
non-citizen, about finding a job. Maybe he's lucky that he doesn't look for
white-collar jobs. That he only has to stand outside a home depot in the rain
and hope to get randomly selected, jump into the pick-up, and head off to
whatever manual labor might make him a few bucks that day, so he can put a
small portion away for his family and use the rest to buy something from the
dollar menu.

Poor us, we starving, huddled, highly educated, successful, safe, free, white
middle-classes.

Jobless? Cancer? Kids to support? Even with all of that, there's still so many
options and opportunities afforded to this person. Sometimes things won't be
perfect. Bumps in the road happen to everyone at some point or another. But
that doesn't mean you have to wallow in your misfortune. You can also take
stock of how much good there still is, and how much worse off you could be. Be
thankful for the bumps and keep on rolling.

~~~
wutbrodo
Perhaps other people have standards higher than rock-bottom? You could just as
easily point to people 500 years ago and say how much better off we are than
them, so why every try to identify shortfalls and improve them?

------
morgante
Thanks to juanplusjuan for submitting!

I'm the lead engineer at Cafe, so if you spot any issues please do let me
know.

(Also, if you want to help build top-tier tools for writers like Deb to
publish online, we're hiring:
[http://cafe.com/careers](http://cafe.com/careers))

~~~
yitchelle
Just read up on the benefits for the lead engineer.

"We offer a great startup work environment with free beer, snacks, and
friendly teammates."

Free beer, really? I have an image of fridge in the office kitchenette where
it is stocked up with beer. How common is this for a US company?

~~~
morgante
> Free beer, really? I have an image of fridge in the office kitchenette where
> it is stocked up with beer. How common is this for a US company?

It's pretty common for tech startups. We take requests for what everyone wants
ordered from FreshDirect each week (including beer & snacks).

------
jprince
Honestly, it sounds like during the best of times she spent each and every
paycheck in full, and then when hard times fell upon her, she had nothing to
fall back on. This is a common symptom in our consumerist society. An author
of her magnitude would have been making enough $ at one point to stow away at
least a few years' expenses if she'd just sacrificed a little more during the
fat period.

~~~
phillmv
Eh, four kids, a breakup, work that was already seasonal in nature, cancer and
laid off in a recession tho.

Also, authors generally don't rake it in and certainly not at the magnitude of
"a few years' expenses".

Maybe she could've would've should've but fixed costs are sticky and you don't
have to look around very hard to find people who can't absorb that many shocks
in such a short period of time.

~~~
zo1
Then, why not income-protection insurance? That would have solved all her
unfortunate-circumstance problems, including the health insurance one.

Especially so for someone with some sort of seasonal income. They're the type
of individuals who should know better than to not have a reasonable buffer (in
case work doesn't come in that season).

~~~
phillmv
You say that as if it were _that_ easy.

I hadn't heard of income-protection insurance and after some googling it's no
wonder: as far as I can it's a kind of disability insurance - it doesn't kick
in if you're merely unemployed.

At that point, you're at the mercy of your state's unemployment insurance -
which you might not be eligible for if you've been working as a contractor or
self employed. Not to mention that seasonal work makes it harder to plan,
since you don't have reliable income to plan around.

There just aren't that many "no-brainer" options for absorbing this many
shocks, at a scale most individuals can cope with.

~~~
phonon
See
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8599991](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8599991)

Pure private unemployment insurance.

------
ChuckMcM
I have read a number of these stories. Mostly people gripping with the
realities of life. A lot of struggle, and a lot of pain. One thing that helps
me is my faith. Not that I think some deity is going to rescue me from hard
times, but to let go the frustration and anger at things I cannot change to a
higher power where I don't have to worry about them.

~~~
rayiner
I also thought about faith, but from a different direction. I think there are
a lot of people, making decisions, who could do with a little fear of eternal
damnation.

~~~
zo1
I was going to respond to your magic-market fairy reference, but I see you
removed it now just as I clicked reply. Oh well... I thought it was the norm
around here to put little "Edit notes" at the bottom of your post if you edit
it?

~~~
jaredsohn
My own personal rule would be to only mark that I edited a post if somebody
actually replied to it and my change was relevant to that response. (It is
unfair to make the response no longer make sense.)

I've actually edited this response six or so times so far, but would expect
few people to notice and marking it as "edited" would just introduce noise.

------
cblock811
> most of us are just a single job loss, a single medical diagnosis, a single
> broken marriage removed from a swirling, chaotic, wholly uncontained abyss.

I completely understand that. I was transitioning from my old industry into
tech and was hit with some surprise medical issues. If I didnt have the luxury
of a large savings I would have been de-railed completely. I was also lucky
that Lyft was an option in SF because I got rejected by several companies
along the way. Now that I have a start in a new career I'm pretty keen on
rebuilding to ward off the next random disaster.

------
bequanna
"For years we Americans have been fed the convenient lie: study hard, work
hard in your chosen field ... and you will be in control of your life and your
destiny."

Surely a nice idea, and maybe I'm a cynic, but what rational adult actually
believes this? Some fields are inherently more stable and well-paying than
others.

"Now, in this new gilded age, where profit takes precedence over people, and
commerce takes precedence over art"

When in the history of the United States has this not been the case?

~~~
michael_h
The "in your chosen field" part was new to me. If your chosen field is buggy
whip manufacturing, well...you're going to have to work hard at something
else.

~~~
bequanna
Exactly. She was in print media and television, two industries that are quite
obviously dying. Yet, she shows little interest in adapting or retraining, she
simply externalizes blame and resists change. Not really a recipe for success.

~~~
Aloha
Television isnt exactly dying, but a writer in that industry has always been a
pretty volatile proposition.

------
gdilla
Great story; great writing. I feel like the Container Store would reject
anyone who seemed overqualified. If only because they know they'd bolt if
something better came up. Of course, that's not a given, but you can
understand where they're coming from.

~~~
jldugger
It's seasonal help. People bolting is a Best Case Scenario.

~~~
justathrow2k
That's pretty close to the truth - people bolting after the seasonal rush is
over is the best case scenario - they still want the people do they end up
hiring for the period to stay on through the entire period.

------
jqm
I've found it's harder to get a job you are massively overqualified for than
to get one you are barely qualified for.

If you need a job which you are massively overqualified for, dumb it down and
do your best to appear no sort of threat. Bosses in entrenched organizations
love people who are just smart enough to push the levers, but not smart enough
to appear promotable, or to become bored or feel unfulfilled and cause some
sort of trouble or to notice obvious abuses and have the mental capacity and
wherewithal to seek remedies....

In these types of situations, appearing dumb and predictable is your best bet.
And that's a very hard act for some people.

------
iconreforged
Here's something outrageous that a reader might have missed: An MRI doesn't
have to be $6000. The marginal cost of one more MRI is pretty low (they go for
under $200 in Japan, and people get them way more frequently), but the price
tag quoted to insurance companies is inflated, so that the insurance companies
can bargain the hospitals back down. Only the uninsured end up paying a
needlessly large sticker price for things like MRIs.

------
boonez123
You can only consider you've tried to get a job if you put out 100+ cv's.
Sharpen the tool (ie. Make your CV perfect), then send out 100 resumes.

Good luck.

------
Mikeb85
Seems to me like the author is seriously overqualified to be working at the
Container Store. That's probably why she was rejected.

Also, the whole article is a great example of why single-payer socialised
health care is a good thing. Living in Canada, I don't have to worry that a
job loss means no health coverage.

~~~
phillmv
>Living in Canada, I don't have to worry that a job loss means no health
coverage.

I wouldn't be _that_ smug; you're still one accident or one cancer away from
destitution. The surgery may be fully covered, but you're shit out of luck if
you're unemployed and need physio/cancer drugs.

I'm still baffled by the complexity Americans have to put up with, but we
still got pretty large cracks in our system.

~~~
Mikeb85
There's also employment insurance from the government, disability insurance,
etc... I grew up knowing someone who's been legitimately disabled for 20
years. She owns a house and gets on fine, not rich by any means, but lives a
decent quality of life, without any family to speak of. Our social net isn't
ideal, but its much better than most Canadians think (I know its a Canadian
quality to be critical of ourselves)...

------
otakucode
When the Industrial Revolution came around, the amount of value a worker could
produce increased a great deal. But society saw that increase as belonging to
the business owner who purchased the machine. Wages fell and fell as worker
productivity increased. Entire families, including children, had to work just
to survive. After a great deal of fighting, and not a little bloodshed, we got
the definition of a 40 hour workweek, and society came to see it as proper
that a single person working 40 hours a week should be paid a wage high enough
that they could comfortably support an entire family. Society expected
employers to share the increased value workers were generating with the
workers.

We're facing a similar situation now. Computers and automation technology came
into the workplace around 1980 or so. And society sees the increased value
workers create thanks to these tools as belonging to the company, not to the
worker. The idea that a worker should be paid enough that they can work 40
hours and provide for an entire family comfortably has vanished. Now the
concern is only that no one be paid above the market rate for their position,
and that the market rate be kept low. Society and the business world was
entirely unprepared with the breakneck pace of productivity growth that
computers brought about. The idea of having wages keep pace with the
productivity gains simply seemed absurd, as it would require large and
frequent raises. And now we've gotten so far behind, with wages stagnating for
decades while companies have grown accustomed to ludicrous profit margins,
that any reasonable correction seems ridiculous. Will we see society come
around and consider it proper that a worker once more is entitled to a good
portion of the value they create? Or will companies devalue jobs to the point
where taking one costs more than they pay? Will we be able to avoid bloodshed
this time?

------
rasz_pl
This should be titled "Life was good while I was rich".

US healtcare is so fucked up :/

------
dang
Url changed from [http://www.nextavenue.org/article/2014-11/rejected-job-
conta...](http://www.nextavenue.org/article/2014-11/rejected-job-container-
store) to original source.

~~~
morgante
Thanks!

------
SimpleXYZ
The actual content aside, what a fantastic writing style the author has! It's
so... engaging.

------
Someone1234
Why do authors/sites insist on doing this:

[https://i.imgur.com/aCAmbQ2.png](https://i.imgur.com/aCAmbQ2.png)

It is super annoying and adds no additional content by design. There's like
four or five of these throughout the article.

As to the article most of the issues seem to revolve around a broken
healthcare system (i.e. no public option, insurance through employers,
unemployed pay more than employed, etc). Although the author does start to
come across as a little entitled when she brought up her Harvard education and
how people like her weren't meant to be in positions like this...

I liked the first 2/3 of the article, just the end is kind of irksome.
Harvard, CEO pay, gender gap, etc none of this came across like the author
likely intended. I bet she didn't customise her resume for "The Container
Store" job and just forwarded her normal/writer one.

~~~
morgante
Thanks for the feedback!

I actually definitely agree with you: that pull quote in particular added no
value and I've removed it.

We've had this debate internally (I'm personally not a fan of pull quotes),
but a lot of writers like them for the ability to highlight key points and to
break up the stories.

Would it maybe be helpful if we didn't make the pull quotes full width? Or
required that they be shorter?

~~~
Someone1234
I find them annoying because I naturally "have" to read them. So I wind up
reading the same-ish paragraph twice (intended?).

It doesn't help that because of the size and margin you actually need to
scroll past it rather than it being a more subtle part of the text.

Something like this:

[https://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/files/2012/07/pullquote_reg...](https://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/files/2012/07/pullquote_regions.jpg)

Likely wouldn't bug me because it is impossible (given the context) to assume
you're meant to read it. Whereas when you stick it inline but make it bigger
it could be either read or not read depending on the author's intent.

This too looks better:

[https://www.drupal.org/files/images/better-pullquote-
example...](https://www.drupal.org/files/images/better-pullquote-example.png)

Not inline also and easy to ignore (which might be "bad" depending on the
intent of the pull quotes).

~~~
shetter
They made it like that for the mobile readers obviously. Ideally you'd want
responsive design so it doesn't need to stay full width even on wide
computer/tablet screens, but if you can't do that then you have to give
priority to the iPhones. For some reason.

