English 101
Reading this article, I came across something I do sometimes and it inspired an entry. I'll take inspiration wherever I can get it. I did the same thing as the MSNBC author not long ago in the comments here. A proofreader, if there is such a thing anymore, should have caught this.
There have been 40 games have been played in 12 cities outside the United States.
I think there’s a few too many have beens in that sentence or maybe there’s supposed to be a that in it but I know how this came about. You’re composing your thoughts as you type, decide to do it differently, and then forget to remove the remnants of your previous version. You then press “send” or “publish” or “print” without realizing what you did or before you realize you did it and then its out there and you can’t take it back. I take no comfort in knowing that even professionals in a professional news organization on a major news website make the same mistakes. I’m not a stickler and it should be noted that this sort of thing doesn’t really annoy me when others do it unless I can’t figure out what the author is trying to say or unless I totally get it wrong because of something the author left out or left in. It only annoys me when I do it. Disclaimer: An editor may change that sentence before anyone else sees it. That’s the beauty of the electronic media. Update (3:40PM CST): It has been corrected. It now reads:
Forty such games have been played in 12 cities outside the United States.
13 days until Ya Boys Auction, 22 days until CFFL Draft Day, and 33 days until football season begins...............
Quote of the Day
Women need to be aware that when they say "It's a nice day," men will often conclude "She wants me."
Debra Benton, Executive Coach
Blog of the day here.
Quote from said blog (July 12? - Departures entry) : "I like the state of being on the way to somewhere, not having arrived yet - probably because that's how my life feels most of the time."
I have no problem with those on personal blogs, or in general writing (as long as I can decipher the meaning, as you say) but they infuriate me in paid media (whether electronic or print.) It's their job, their very stock-in-trade to use the language carefully and correctly, and to proof their writing. Carelessness in proofing makes me suspect they're equally careless in content and fact-checking. In fact, I've often found that to be true. I'll consider a source unreliable and stop reading altogether after only a very few such screw-ups.
I've worked in newsrooms, written for publication, and currently do a lot of proofing at work. I know how hard it is to keep those gremlins out of written work. (Especially one's own... that's what editors/proofreaders are for.) But just because it's hard, doesn't mean not doing it should be excused.
I definitely find that the electronic media is more often guilty of this than the print folks. Maybe it's the short-deadline immediacy of electronic media, but I also think there's a lax attitude that's more prevalent online too. And maybe lower budgets?
Anyway, sorry for the long winded harangue. This is a pet peeve, for sure. I've bitched about it on my blog too.
Oh yea, and it drives me BATSHIT when I do that kind of thing. I'm sure this comment will adhere to the rule that one always makes an egregious spelling/grammar error when complaining about the errors of others.
Good points all. Somebody did catch up with it and correct it. I suppose you're right about the inexcusability of it all. The purpose of language is to communicate and the shortcuts people tend to take with punctuation, slang, proofing, capitalization, etc undermines that purpose. If you don't mean to communicate with the written or spoken language, you're wasting your time. You're wasting mine, too, but not for long.
One other thing: When I follow up and maybe press a little bit to understand a person when they make one or more of these mistakes, I just love it when they say, "You know what I meant.". I have to back up and take a timeout when that happens.
Rob:
Interesting that you say that it was eventually corrected.
So what they're saying is they can't be bothered to proof thmeselves, but rather will wait until their readers do it for them.
Journalism at its finest.
And "you know what I meant"? I'm sure with ya on that one too.
P.
I don't think the readers had much to do with the correction and I doubt it was corrected because I or anyone else linked to it. I think some proofreader or editor discovered it after-the-fact and changed it. I suppose that's a good thing. Would be better if he did so before it hit the web but I suppose they couldn't scoop the competition if they were concerned with accuracy.
Thanks for linking to my blog, Rob. Amazing to discover I'm seen in Bush, Louisiana. Didn't know GWB had a town named after him.....?
:)
Believe the town was here first, Natalie. Both President Bushes sent someone here for a whistle stop speech. I wasn't living here yet either time when candidate, then President George H W Bush sent some relative here to make a speech and was working both times when candidate, then President George W Bush sent a relative here. I think it might have been current First Lady, Laura, all four times but I just don't remember.