Someone at Yahoo! News should be preparing to crack down on editors who don’t know a noun (like crackdown) and a phrasal verb (like crack down):
Do you think a crackdown will actually happen?
This appeared today on yahoo.com and nothing could be further from accurate than this use of farther:
Confused about the difference between further and farther? Here’s what the American Heritage Dictionary says:
Since the Middle English period many writers have used farther and further interchangeably. According to a relatively recent rule, however, farther should be reserved for physical distance and further for nonphysical, metaphorical advancement. Thus 74 percent of the Usage Panel prefers farther in the sentence If you are planning to drive any farther than Ukiah, you’d better carry chains, and 64 percent prefers further in the sentence We won’t be able to answer these questions until we are further along in our research.
The folks at Yahoo! seem to make the same mistake continually. This time it’s Yahoo! News scribes who can’t tell the difference between continuously and continually:
I wasn’t in the Senate to verify this for myself, but I’m guessin’ that the legislation wasn’t being amended ceaselessly, without stop. But it may have been continually amended.
I’m not surprised anymore when I see that writers for Yahoo! Style have no idea how to make a possessive out of a plural noun. It happens nearly every day:
So, the writer and editor didn’t know that athletes’s makes no sense (they should have written athletes’). What surprises me is the fact that they thought they needed to make it clear that it was physical bodies, and not imaginary bodies, that are the focus of “microagressions” (they should have written microaggressions).
The Duggar family, known in the States for their reality TV show, their strict fundamental beliefs, and their overly large family, is renting space to a religious tenant.
The Yahoo! Style article doesn’t mention if the renter is living with the Duggars. But renting to a Christian is certainly in keeping with the family’s religious tenets.
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.”