I am indebted to Yahoo! Celebrity for explaining that two people had a joint interview together. I guess doing a joint interview separately would present a logistical challenge:
This headline on the Yahoo! front page takes idiotic idioms to the next level:
I suppose if you’re just learning English, you might not know common expressions like “take it to the next level” or “take the next step.” If that’s the case, I suggest you have someone familiar with common idioms edit your writing before you publish it.
Sometimes, when I read something on Yahoo! Celebrity, I can’t help wondering if the writer is familiar with basic English idioms, like this:
Actually, the Kardashians have been renting a home; the owner of the home has been renting out the home.
There are some mistakes I can overlook. Still, I can’t help noticing the typos:
and the missing apostrophe in what should be Kardashians’:
and at least one word too many here:
Can you overlook errors like these?
The folks over at Yahoo! News claim that they follow the Associated Press style by referring to the country in the news as Ukraine, and not the Ukraine. It looks like someone at the Yahoo! front page didn’t get the memo:
Let’s lay this out in black and white for the Yahoo! Celebrity writer: If you don’t know that fiancé is an engaged man (and fiancée is an engaged woman), perhaps you should refer to the man as betrothed. Or maybe boyfriend:
If you’re using it as an adjective, then black-and-white gets two hyphens. (As a noun, it doesn’t need those hyphens.)
So, Jessica Simpson posted a black-and-white photo on Instagram. Is it any surprise that it looked like she was wearing a black and white dress? (I really don’t know how the writer could tell what color the dress was.) Repeating a word isn’t the worst mistake a writer can make, but claiming she “was laid out” makes it sound like the poor woman was prepared for a funeral, not a wedding:
Finally, the writer alleges that her hand was “placed seductively over her eyebrow.” Unless her eyebrow is somewhere on the top of her head, I think the writer made a misstatement:
From the “I Already Knew That” department of redundancy comes this headline on Yahoo! News:
It’s pretty safe to say that if someone created a slide it was a DIY (do-it-yourself) slide. But, thanks for the info.
I’d like to say that the article is a bit of an improvement over the headline, but I can’t. I’m familiar with the idiom “to the tune of,” but have never seen or heard it used to describe an approximate length. But what do I know? I’ll tell you what I know: I know that a luge is a sled or the sport involving a sled. It is not a water slide as this writer alleges:
I also know the builder of the water slide tried to keep his costs low. And he did it by using wooden pallets:
He did not use palettes. This is a palette:
What he used were pallets, which look something like this:
What makes this article on Yahoo! Travel a candidate for Worst Travel Writing of the Day? It could be this paragraph, which starts out with a non-sentence and then gets a tad repetitive:
OK, so that was ugly. Maybe it was just a fluke. What could possibly be wrong with this?
Well, in the first place, the Capital Wheel is not in Washington. It’s in Maryland. That’s kinda a giant embarrassment. A lesser mistake is referring to the U.S. Capital (the capital of the U.S. is Washington, DC) when the writer meant the building, which is the Capitol.
Finally, the error that made this article a shoo-in for the Worst Travel Writing of the Day trophy: