The United States Congress will be voting on the care of heath:
I had no idea that heath care was even a thing or that it needed federal funding. Thank goodness Yahoo! News is here to keep us informed!
Yahoo! Style staff seems to include a writer who is still learning English. That’s OK. There’s nothing wrong with hiring ESL students, especially if they’re working for a trade school, where on-the-job training is part of the experience. If they’re employed by a for-profit company, then they need a competent editor to avoid publishing an embarrassing statement like this:
Try to ignore the obvious grammatical gaffe and focus on the allegation that removing layers [of clothing] has never been exciting. You won’t get an argument from me.
If you’re familiar with Linda Farrow, you know it’s a brand of luxury sunglasses. Did you know that Linda Farrow offers sandals? Me neither. But that’s what I read on Yahoo! Style:
Of course, those sandals don’t look like gold, do they? You’d think the writer was actually describing aviator sunglasses.
I know nothing about fashion. So is it my ignorance of current clothing trends that makes me not see what this writer sees?
She claims that these two women’s jackets matched. But I just don’t see it:
She could be right. If she means that both gals are wearing blue jackets with a zipper and two sleeves, she’s right. As long as we ignore the fact the Ms. Hadid’s jacket has a ruched front, but Ms. Carey’s doesn’t, she right. If we overlook the difference in the width and colors in the bands, she’s right. If we don’t take into account that the jacket on the left has ruching along the zipper and the one on the right has none, and the one on the right has a collar and a long zipper, but the one on the left has neither, she’s right. And if we don’t consider that one is cropped and one isn’t, she’s right. And one has set-in sleeves and the other, raglan sleeves, she’s right. So, it must be me.
I certainly know now to trust this writer and not my lying eyes. It’s my lying eyes that tell me that Ms. Hadid’s zipper isn’t circular, but her zipper pull is:
I’ve got to start reading more fashion sites if I’m going to keep up with fashion. But maybe I won’t start with Yahoo! Style.
In an era of alternative facts, the editors at yahoo.com want to be sure that there’s no mistaking the sequence of events in Daryl Easton’s demise. First, he killed himself, then he was found dead:
This little excerpt from Yahoo! Style could use a little oomph. A pick-me-up and some hyphens are in order:
The writer could probably use a little pick-me-up too, or at least a little pick-me-up-and-take-me-to-a-dictionary. There she might learn that umph, when it does appear in a dictionary, is an expression of disgust or skepticism.
If the current Mrs. Trump is like the first ladies to come before her, does that mean that in the future there will be first ladies who were first ladies in the past before the current first lady of the present?
I’m so confused. Why didn’t the Yahoo! Style writer just say, “Like the first ladies who came before her”? Or just, “Like the first ladies before her”? Or, “Like other first ladies” since all other first ladies came before the current Mrs. Trump? Unless she means the future first ladies from the past. That would involve a DeLorean and Doc Brown.
You know the old saying “it’s better to write fast than to write well”? No? That’s because I made it up after reading this on Yahoo! Style:
I’m trying to come up with a reason for so many errors, like the missing punctuation in what should be ’70s, and the use of its for the contraction it’s. And more missing punctuation and the misspelling of granddad. And why the writer would call this sweater a “sleeves sweater”:
It’s a sleeveless sweater or a vest or even a sweater vest.
But why so many errors? I can only surmise that the writer was under an incredible time crunch, that she’s not a great typist and that she hasn’t completely mastered English. And the company she works for has very, very low standards for content. Maybe even no standards.