Typos from those who should know better

[ex-khobar Andy]

I saw two beauts this morning before breakfast.

One from The Guardian (and yes, let's face it, that's why they are called The Grauniad by some) discussing yesterday's Barcelona final between Tsitsipas and Nadal (my underlining):

But the Spaniard, as he has done so many times before, weathered the storm, began sewing doubt into his opponent’s mind by relentlessly targeting his backhand and turned the match around.

And CNN - again, often famous for just this sort of thing - talking about systemic racism:

CNN's Jim Acosta spells out why he says the Fox News hosts and GOP lawmakers pedaling the "big lie" about the 2020 presidential election are spreading a new, more toxic falsehood.

The words they wanted are of course 'sowing' and 'peddling' respectively.

Question: is it a typo when they just have the wrong homophone?

[TPFKA@W]

Question: is it a typo when they just have the wrong homophone?

NO.

[Burning Petard]

Me, I like the 'sewing" version better. Rather than simple broadcasting of the seeds of doubt, I visualize a brain cut open, the doubt inserted, and the brain stitched up again.

snailgate

[Long Run]

Painful, though, and their noggin won't be much good for headers anytime soon.

[Bicycle Bill]

Question: is it a typo when they just have the wrong homophone?

NO.

If you are going to try to present yourself as a reputable news source but then do something like this, then it's either a typo or pure ineptitude — your choice.

More evidence, by the way, that AI will never be 100% foolproof.  Use the incorrect word but spell it correctly, and programs like 'Spell-Check' will let it pass.

-"BB"-

[Joe Guy]

Question: is it a typo when they just have the wrong homophone?

Know!

[Econoline]

Question: is it a typo when they just have the wrong homophone?

Know!

Write on, Joe!

[ex-khobar Andy]

Although I posted this under Laffs, I think I'm making a serious point. When we (or most of us) were growing up we read books and newspapers which had been through an editing process. The school I was at took all the daily newspapers so I read every one, every day. I might not agree with what the Telegraph (for example) had to say, but it was well written.

Kids these days (yes, yes, I know) read all sorts of unedited stuff off the iternatter. Quite apart from the ludicrous 'thinking' behind much of it, there is a sense that grammar and word choice doesn't matter.

Another 'typo' I came across today was a discussion of celebrities and their diseases. I didn't know that one of the Jonas brothers was a Type 1 diabetic, or that Jack Osborne had multiple sclerosis. I did know about Venus Williams and her Sjögren’s syndrome. The text of the piece:

Venus Williams has dealt with Sjögren’s syndrome for most of her career

Each autoimmune system illness comes with its own symptoms. Sjögren’s syndrome usually leaves people with joint pain, a dry mouth, and fatigue which Venus Williams has learned the hard way. Even so, the tennis superstar has never let her condition keep her down, especially as she now has a host of tennis titles and awards to her name.

And the picture which illustrates this piece?



Does this qualify as a typo?

[Long Run]

Yikes. I will say that when my kids were in school, their teachers spent a lot of time reinforcing that you have to carefully review what you read on the internet. There is legit stuff on the internet to go along with a lot of unreliable information. E.g., Wikipedia was always a big caution as to reliability (usually okay as a starting point, but everything would need to be confirmed by looking at the source material).

[Bicycle Bill]

Yikes. I will say that when my kids were in school, their teachers spent a lot of time reinforcing that you have to carefully review what you read on the internet. There is legit stuff on the internet to go along with a lot of unreliable information. E.g., Wikipedia was always a big caution as to reliability (usually okay as a starting point, but everything would need to be confirmed by looking at the source material).

I too remember when the internet was in its infancy and info found on Wikipedia was considered 'sketchy' — but by comparison to some of the sites being regularly cited and quoted by various factions with their own particular axes to grind or agendas to promote, it is now almost as august and authoritative as the old World Book or Encyclopædia Britannica used to be.

-"BB"-

[ex-khobar Andy]

Another CNN one:

Trivers also added that the activity did not have "any adverse effect on our scholars or the functioning of our schools" and that the school system has since instituted financial safeguards, which lead to the discovery of the withdrawals.

I think I knew the difference between 'led' and 'lead' when I was about 8. Is it so fucking difficult to get it right?

[ex-khobar Andy]

I remember a Nature study (I just looked it up - 2005) in the early days of Wikipedia which concluded that, for scientific articles, Wikipedia was very close to Britannica in terms of accuracy. For articles on subjects I know something about, it's been pretty accurate. I've done a few hundred Wikipedia edits and when I look back through my 'contributions' they are mostly clarifications or provision of references and very few corrections of fact.

[Big RR]

I've seen some pretty big mistakes/inaccuracies in a number of scientific articles on wiki (not major gaffes, but clearly reginizable if you know the area)--some so big that they can only be deliberate. I have a few acquaintances (I don't know them all that well) who tell me they spend time online putting in false, but believable, information in wiki articles. It's really not that easy, because you would need some real understanding of the subject or it would quickly be seen as false; I think there are a number of people who do this for "fun" (kind or reminds me of the people who try to hack sites for fun). Which is why I always try to verify Wiki through other sites; kind of like the popular press when it comes to discussing science and technology.

[Long Run]

Had a high school classmate who (brazenly and falsely) asserted he was on the U.S. Olympic team, and he or a family member put it on Wiki. On the plus side, the entry was eventually deleted but it still shows up on archived results.

[Econoline]

[eddieq]

I've told this story before, but perhaps not here.

Early in my post-college career, I worked for a "Direct Mail Marketing Company" (i.e. "junk" mail). We had a number of clients including the Colonial Penn insurance (Ed McMahon stuff), American Express, the "10 CD's for a penny" people, etc. Part of my job was text prep (i.e. typing in the letters to the system from their sample) and graphics (digitizing signatures and logos, etc.). It was the 90's, so a lot of manual processes for converting these items.

We get a letter from Nationwide Insurance that has a big block header with "Insurance for your every need" or something to that effect. Huge letters, like 48 point font. Right at the top of the page. When converting it, I fat fingered/missed the leading I. So it said, in massive letters, "Nsurance for your every need". I missed it. Two members of my team proofreading missed it. Customer service rep missed it and sent it to the client, who missed it AND signed off on it as good. Goes to programming who merges the mailing list and sends it out to the print center. 9,000 copies later, the printer operator sees it and calls his supervisor. 9 AM the next day, I come in to several people in suits with coffee mugs standing around my cubicle, ready to give me a raft of crap for my error. After about 40 minutes of "how can this happen? We need procedures in place to prevent this in the future" and me saying (with very little backup from my boss), "we have procedures. Literally EVERYONE missed this" I finally asked, "I'll do better, can I sit down, fix this, and get it back out to print so we don't delay fulfillment of this job?" I never really heard more about it. I think the client was pissed but also pissed at themselves for actually signing off on it.

Typos happen. They don't bother me as much as they used to. They usually give me a chuckle.

[Bicycle Bill]

That's why EVERYBODY in the process should be looking out for things.  Don't automatically assume that the guy(s) ahead of you got it right and you don't need to sweat the small stuff.  The low man on the totem pole who is catching the finished product at the back end of the Stahl folder may know more about that specific topic than the suits do, so EVERYONE should have the ability to sound off if they see an error.

Take this song by Sly and the Family Stone, for example.  "Thank You For Letting Me Be Myself", right?



Well, sort of.  The ACTUAL title, as the band released it, is "Thank You (Falettinme Be Mice Elf Agin)".
(WHY they did it that way is a subject for another discussion, but I bet it involves drugs).
And if you're going to be producing a CD of "Hits of the 1970s" and you are going to include that song, it is only proper that the title of the song on the paper sleeve insert matches the same title that the freakin' BAND gave to it.

-"BB"-

[MGMcAnick]

If you want to see some really funny typos, just google mistyped texts. There are thousands of them. Obviously too many to list here.

Mrs Mc and I discovered them while staying in the guest bedroom at her brother's house one morning. We were laughing so hard his wife truly wondered what we were doing. Well, it was fun.

[Gob]

"wawa skittletits" still has me in hysterics.