"It's important to support business, but meal deal vouchers don't substitute for effective public health messaging and measures"

The above excerpt is from a political advert and was ridiculed for its poor grammar and structure today on Twitter. In particular, the use of "don't". Is anyone able to explain exactly why this is inappropriate?

My English isn't perfect and I've been trying to figure out why this is not correct.

EDIT - Here is the tweet


  • 2
    Without quoting one or two of the tweets, it is hard to tell what is being criticized. I do not see any grammatical errors. I do not like certain aspects of its style, but that is personal opinion. (For example, I prefer "are not substitutes," but that merely reflects my taste.) More importantly, what is quoted does not make any sense without additional context: why these represent a binary choice is not clear. – Jeff Morrow Jul 8 '20 at 17:07
  • Here is the tweet. twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1280843436657172481 – Harry Jul 8 '20 at 18:07
  • 1
    Stylistically inelegant perhaps, but not ungrammatical. – BillJ Jul 8 '20 at 18:19
  • 1
    @Harry What are the criticisms? You do not link to any criticisms. (I do NOT twitter: it seems to make everyone who uses it revert to the intelligence of a six year old.) Please quote one or two. – Jeff Morrow Jul 8 '20 at 18:41
  • From what I gather, the use of "Don't + substitute". 1. Don’t substitute is, in my opinion, horrible English. Are no substitute? 2. “Aren’t a substitute” would be my preference – Harry Jul 8 '20 at 20:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.