A lost win

I know virtually nothing about American football, but I do know that this tidbit on yahoo.com is wrong:

Philadelphia isn’t looking for its first Super Bowl. It’s looking for its first Super Bowl win. That’s kinda different.

Advertisements

Real entertainment

The real entertainment in Yahoo Entertainment comes from the typos on its home page:

For those outside the United States (and possibly for some people in the United States), we do not hold elections retroactively. Presidential elections are held every four years, and only in years whose last two digits are divisible by four. So, the next election for president is 2020.  Seems like Trevor Noah knows more about our elections than the folks at Yahoo.

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.

 

That just tanked

This intro to an Instagram star on Yahoo Lifestyle just tanked:

This is Tank McNamara, a comic strip character:

George Resch is known as Tank Sinatra.

Fake news?

Would you be skeptical, like me, if you read this on Yahoo News?

I’m no expert, but the cost of $25K per day seemed awfully low to me. So, I read the article to find out the truth:

Looks like Yahoo News might really be Yahoo Fake News.

Ability to count optional

You don’t need to be able to count to write for Yahoo Finance:

This writer can’t count and can’t get the name of the retirement account right: It’s 401(k). So, why would anyone trust the advice from this site?

I’m soooo confused

Sometimes I’ll read a sentence on Yahoo! and there’s numbers in the sentence, and I try to do a little first-grade arithmetic (cuz I don’t trust Yahoo! writers’ numerical abilities), and I wind up with a headache. This is one of those times. After reading this on Yahoo! Celebrity, I’m very confused (and in need of a Tylenol):

I guess Mr. Pitt and Ms. Jolie have been together for 12 years. But they’ve been married for two more? I’m so confused. Have they been married two more years than they’ve been together? Like, 14 years of matrimony? Is that even possible? Maybe they got married by proxy two years before they actually met. Or maybe the writer is a tad confused and meant they “had been together for 12 years and married for two.”

A couple of S’s?

It’s become almost a daily occurrence at Yahoo! Style: the inability to form possessive of a plural noun:

What the heck is so hard about this? If you’re writing about one couple, it’s couple’s. If more than one couple, it’s couples’. If you’re really confused, it’s couples’s and it’s wrong.

While I’m pondering the reason for that common mistake, perhaps you’ll solve another mystery for me: Why did the writer (and presumably her editor) refer to a boy with the pronoun her? Is this a transgender thing?

Close enough

Don’t expect these folks to do actual research. A simple Google search is too much of a bother for the writers and editors at Yahoo! Celebrity. They’re happy letting us know that Taylor Swift’s estate is “near Rhode Island”:

So, it might be in Massachusetts or Connecticut or even Narragansett Bay. Real journalists would take the time to learn that Watch Hill, the location of Ms. Swift’s mansion, is in Rhode Island. I’d say that’s pretty “near.”

This doesn’t pass the smell test

If only there were a way for the Yahoo! Style writer to verify the spelling of the captions she writes. Maybe if she had a picture of the eau de parfum she’s writing about, she wouldn’t make these misspellings:

Oh, wait! Here’s the actual picture that goes with that caption:

Maybe she didn’t think she needed to look at it. But when writing this caption:

. . . don’t you think she should have checked out the picture of the bottle of eau de parfum, which is quite different from cologne and eau de cologne:

Well, she finally got the product right in this caption:

. . .  but not the name of the manufacturer:

If these captions didn’t appear right next to the product pictures, perhaps no one would have noticed that the writer can’t copy words right under her nose. But they’re there and there’s no amount of eau de parfum that can cover the stink.

%d bloggers like this: