One would think these days that someone, anyone would take the time to make sure their “copy” was typo free before posting it on the Internet. Sure, I know I have had this problem myself, and nothing is more embarrassing to me than to see one of my stories with a typo. But that’s why I try to make sure I review my stuff time and again.
On the other hand, once I turn it over to the editors I never want to see it again. Which sort of may explain why these stories, carried by “big media” are left with glaring stupid errors. How much effort would it take to fix them? Not much, I know, and yet it seems as if the stream of media flotsam just continues to flow like the junk in the lower James River.
So, here are a few dumb media mistakes from one day:
Here’s another error, this time from a Fox News article about Donald Trump responding to the bombing in Belgium. It might be noted that the media outlets contacted all the candidates by phone and Trump was the first to call back, followed by Ted Cruz, and then Hillary Clinton. But this is what came out in a story by Howard Kurtz:
“Indeed, Clinton later told MSNBC that some candidates don't understand the important of NATO.”
Should that not be the “importance” of? I am certain that Howard knows his English, but these kinds of mistakes make all of us wonder. Psychologically, we all tend to fill in gaps or fix typos on the fly. That’s one of the reasons we can read a sentence with jumbled words, providing that the first and last letters are correct. We do it automatically, it’s also one of the reasons typos appear in a document.
Here’s a mistake from a cutline that went with an Associated Press photograph:
“President Barack Obama hugs outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius as he stands with Vice President Joe Biden and his nominee to be her replacement, Budget Director Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Friday, April 11, 2014, in the Rose Garden f the White House in Washington. The moves come just over a week after sign-ups closed for the first year of insurance coverage under the so-called Obamacare law.(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)”
It’s a simple common error. Someone simply didn’t hit the o key when typing “of.” No one should be put in prison for such a mistake, but still. It’s an AP photo, and simple everyday spell check ought to have caught it.
Here’s another instance of error, but was this error just a misspelling or were they trying to abbreviate the word “with?”
“President Obama orders his burrito bowl at a Chipotle today before lunch w participants in the working families summit. (Pete Souza/White House photo)”
If saving space is the reason you would abbreviate a word, why on earth would it be such a short word as with? Cutting out the “ith” save a grand total of three spaces, hardly enough to make it worthwhile.
Here’s another faux pas with a typo, this time reported in The Politico:
“Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush endorsed Senator Ted Cruz on Wednesday. It’s clear that the establishment if doing everything it can to defeat popular New York businessman Donald Trump.”
I suppose in this case, if is not is, unless you want to know the meaning of is, which may be if.
Here’s another example where, perhaps, the word processer got the better of the reporter.
“Let’s be honest with ourselves, right now ISIS is winning this war and will continuing committing utter carnage on our streets on an ever graver and more barbaric scale until they are stopped.
Perhaps making continue into continuing would be okay if the rest of the sentence were changed, but probably not. In this case, having continuing committing next to each other is just confusing.
These kinds of mistakes can be found every day throughout the major media outlets. No one is exempt from poor grammar, not even me sadly enough. To me, it’s simply another sign of the country’s sagging values. Maybe everyone just needs a good editor? The truth is that sometimes we get in a hurry and are forced to publish something that could use just one more review.
Thank God we don’t apply those rules to the poor logic that seems to abound in most critical pieces printed today. Is it just me, or can we tell the reporters opinion in most stories published today under the name of journalism? Whatever happened to “just the facts, ma’am?” Gee, I think I know how to think for myself without having some talking head muddle the message.
No comments:
Post a Comment