This is infuriating

This is infuriating. At least I think that’s the word the Yahoo News editor meant to use:

I don’t know if Ellen DeGeneres is infuriated, too, by the fact that the editor or writer can’t quite get her name right.

Advertisements

Feeling the stress

It must have been a stressful weekend over at the editor’s desk at yahoo.com. Maybe that’s why the editors missed the missing apostrophe here:

Or failed to recognize that schoolyard is one word:

Someone should demand to know why a typo like this slipped through the spell-checker:

(Oh, yeah. I forgot. Yahoo editors don’t use spell-checkers. Or proofreaders.)

No spell-checker would have caught this perfectly spelled bit of nonsense:

I have no idea what that was supposed to be. Can anyone translate it for me?

Exactly the same except for the differences

Editors at Yahoo Lifestyle seem to have a different definition of “matching” than I do. Here’s what I mean:

See that headline? It refers to these “matching” dresses:

Did you notice that the dresses are alike except for the color. And the belt. And the sleeves. And the length. And the neckline. And the layers on the skirt. And the details on the bodice. And the train. So if you overlook those little items, they are indeed matching dresses. So maybe I’m just being picky. Or maybe the editor doesn’t know what “matching” means.

 

Uncommonly confused words

Halloween-themed weddings are all the rage around this time of year. It also seems that boat-themed weddings are making inroads into the matrimonial biz, if you believe Yahoo Lifestyle:

Although that excerpt appeared in an article about “Halloweddings,” the author slipped in a mention about a scull-covered cake. Do you think she was a tad confused? A skull-covered cake might be more appropriate.

This is a skull-covered cake:

 

This is a scull:

It’s a little different, no? I’ll file this one under “Uncommonly Confused Words” because I’ve never seen anyone make that mistake before.

Maybe at the at the isn’t a such big deal

Maybe a repeated word or two on the home page of Yahoo Lifestyle isn’t the worst mistake one could make:

It’s just the most obvious, and one easily caught by a proofreader, editor, or anyone familiar with English. But on the same page, there’s a little problem with the order of words:

Maybe that isn’t such a big deal; it’s just another mistake that should have been eliminated before it made it into our consciences.

 

Who do you trust?

Do you trust a site like Yahoo News after reading this on its front page?

Sloppy (or no) proofreading? Or reliance of a spell checker? Either way, a typo undermines the credibility of any news site. Careful proofreading by a literate human being is a bulwark against typos.

Regarding your word choice…

Regarding the use of the phrase in regards to on Yahoo News: It’s considered either out-and-out wrong or at best, nontraditional, by word nerds:

The correct wording is in regard to. But many editors prefer the use of regarding or concerning.

Break out the eraser

Time to break out the eraser and correct this from Yahoo Lifestyle:

When it’s one word, breakout is a noun or adjective. The phrasal verb is two words: break out.

That’s a new one

I’ve seen all kinds of misuse of the apostrophe, but this one on yahoo.com take’s the cake:

According to dictionaries…

According to dictionaries, Yahoo News editors can’t spell meteorologists:

%d bloggers like this: