D. Algom, E. Chajut, and S. Lev presented a series of definitional, conceptual, and empirical arguments in support of their conclusion that the classic and emotional Stroop effects are, in their words, "unrelated phenomena" (p. 336), such that the term emotional Stroop effect is a misnomer in reference to the relatively greater interference in ink color naming of emotional versus neutral words. These are strong claims. In this comment, the author critically examines each component of Algom et al.'s case and argues that, in fact, none of these components represents compelling evidence in support of their eventual conclusions.