An Oldie but Goodie from The Christian Science Monitor

Picture us, if you will, standing in front of The Christian Science Monitor, arms akimbo, one hip popped, and a horrified look on our face. If we were inclined to such phrases, the words that would fall from our disbelieving lips might sound something like, "Oh. No. You. Didn't." If we weren't so stunned, paralyzed even, we would be perilously close to tears.

What, you ask, could inspire such a reaction? The following sentence, which appeared in the Monitor's article, "Obama and Lee Myung-bak both condemn North Korea":

And then, 28 minutes after their appearance began, the two president's walked out of the Rose Garden and down the colonnade to the residence for lunch, followed by a long line of male aides in dark blue suits and a lonely female aide in a summery white outfit.

While we recognize that this line appeared in the Vote Blog, which some might consider to be a less grammatically and punctuationally demanding medium than, say, a more traditional news article, we do not believe that blog authors for "award-winning international news organizations" can be excused for not knowing that under no circumstances whatsoever should an apostrophe be used to denote a plural noun. In fact, to put a very fine point on it, we do not believe that any writer in the English language who has completed a secondary education can be excused for violating such a simple and essential principle of punctuation. Perhaps you think we are too hard, too dictatorial, too merciless. Perhaps we do not care.

For this egregious violation, we hereby award The Christian Science Monitor a We Are (Almost) Speechless, an Oops, Is my Lazy Showing?, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

***** (five stars) - Whaaahhaa? Whodrankshaaallllthershcotch?

A Late Thanksgiving Treat

We're so thankful that we came across this sentence about The Moonstone's Franklin Blake in Jerome Meckier's Hidden Rivalries in Victorian Fiction: Dickens, Realism, and Revaluation:

His resolve not to deny or cuddle his subconscious self is a display of moral superiority over Pip as well as Ablewhite. (p. 143, emphasis ours)

We do not know how, precisely, one would cuddle one's subconscious self, but we suspect that in our present cultural moment, some clever feel-good psychoanalyst somewhere has found a way to do just that.  We would suggest that you skip the costly therapy and simply read the sentence above to yourself when you're blue.  It makes us feel pretty good, if we do say so ourselves.

For this error, we award Mr. Meckier and his editors at The University Press of Kentucky (for shame!) an Oops! Is my Lazy Showing?, a Totally Giggleworthy, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

Forbes.com Phones It In

The writing and editing staffmembers at Forbes.com are responsible for something truly special in their recent article, "American Autos Worth Saving and Writing Off."  They have written a sentence so mind-bendingly bizarre that it almost defies comment -- not in a shocking, We Are (Almost) Speechless kind of way (which category was created in response to egregious errors from sources whose very natures require impeccable proofreading standards, like dictionaries).  Rather, this sentence is so spectacularly flawed that it is difficult to know where to start.  See for yourself:

Unfortunately, Chrysler--nor Ford or GM for that matter--have the luxury of such missteps and are now fighting for survival.

We have here a situation where there are words missing, multiple subject/verb disagreements, and questionable construction. We would add emphasis to highlight the problematic elements, but we don't know where to start.  Something tragic must have happened to the editor. Something tragic certainly happened to the sentence.

For this stunning stumble, we are awarding Forbes.com a Phoning It In with Distinction, an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing?, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

***** (five stars) - Whaaahhaa? Whodrankshaaallllthershcotch?

Oh, for shame!

We discovered this unhappy error in a Reuters article titled, "Qaeda's Zawahri urges attacks on 'criminal' America":

The audio recording was accompanied by visuals including a picture of Obama wearing a yamaka. (emphasis ours)

We suggest that, in the future, Reuters editors consider reading with their eyes rather than their ears.  When reading with one's ears, yamaka could easily seem to be the appropriate word for this sentence.  However, an editor's eyes would reveal (it is to be hoped) the difference between Yamaka, the sixth of seven texts in the collection of sacred Sanskrit writings known as the Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka, and yarmulke, the skullcap worn by Jewish males, mainly those of the Conservative and Orthodox variety, during prayer or religious study.  As Jon Stewart has humorously observed, it's not a Jew beanie; we suppose that "holy Sanskrit text" also numbers among the things a yarmulke is, most decidedly, not.

For this auditory erratum, Reuters is awarded an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing?, a Phoning It In, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

*** (three stars) - I needed a shot just to look myself in the mirror this morning.

Indecent Exposure at College Football News

Avert your eyes, readers, if you can.  We've caught College Football News with their lazy just hanging out for all to see.

In the latest issue of its weekly Fearless Predictions, College Football News makes the following statement:

"Cal and USC have just one loss in conference play, meaning the winner in the Coliseum becomes the Rose Bowl and the loser is likely out of the race." (emphasis ours)

While we agree that the Rose Bowl is a venerable and praiseworthy institution in the college football kingdom, we find it hard to believe that either team would or could be transformed into a stadium seating 100,000 by virtue of a Saturday victory, pomp and tradition notwithstanding.

As with all instances of indecent exposure, this occurrence produces a mixture of shame and amusement for the viewer--a tendency to guffaw as well as blush.  For this reason, College Football News has earned a Totally Giggleworthy and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

Simply too, too!

We are beside ourselves. Behold the following "Middle America" entry from the Thesaurus.com application on Dictionary.com, which cites the 2008 edition of Roget's New Millennium Thesaurus as its source:

Main Entry: Middle America
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: general populice
Synonyms: bourgeoisie, silent majority, subtopia, suburbia, the burbs

Perhaps, like us, you realize that it is unconscionable for a dictionary to have a spelling error, even if said dictionary is online (although it should be noted that Dictionary.com purports to draw from, and rigorously cites, renowned published dictionaries). Perhaps, this discovery has shaken you to your very foundations and you find yourself wondering aloud, "If one cannot trust the dictionary, whom can one trust?" Rest assured, dear readers, when all else fails, The Grammar Wall of Shame will not let you down.

This is only the second offense in The Grammar Wall of Shame's history to merit the designation, We Are (Almost) Speechless. If it pleases you to replay in your mind the scene from Mary Poppins where Mr. Banks is thrown out of the bank, substituting Dictionary.com for Mr. Banks, please do so.

It's that time of year again!

We found this example of AutoCorrect Syndrome in an article titled, "Romney suspends presidential campaign":

"He then told the crowd he disagrees with McCain on a number of issues, but that he'd given the mater a lot of thought and if he fought on all the way to the Republican convention, 'I forestall the launch of a national campaign and frankly I'd be making it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win.'"

Breaking news from the AP: Mitt Romney really loves his mother. We find that to be very moving, although we fail to see what she has to do with the campaign. Wait, is something Manchurian going on here? Somebody check the location of Angela Lansbury.

For this little slip-up, we hereby award the AP an Oops! Is my lazy showing?, a Totally Giggleworthy, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

The AP: Too good to resist!

We are having a hard time keeping ourselves from laughing out loud at this error, which we found in an AP article titled, "Sources: Mitchell Report to name MVPs, All-Stars, won't address amphetamines":

"The Web site cited an unidentifried source close to the trainer."

We confess, we are not exerting ourselves very strenuously to keep from laughing; we are mostly just laughing inappropriately and getting some strange looks from the gentleman refilling the vending machine. We are aware that this error is likely due to the fact that the writer was rushing to break a story about baseball steroid use (snore); nonetheless, um, spell check? Anyone?

The AP earns a Totally Giggleworthy, C for Creative Spelling, an Oops! Is my lazy showing? and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish water bottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

Wall Street Journal Hi-Jinks

We found this poorly punctuated gem in a WSJ.com article titled, "On Mileage, Car Makers Offer a Hybrid Message":

"Auto makers contend tougher regulations won't necessarily get Americans to switch to more fuel-efficient vehicles, and point to American's love for their trucks."

The Wall Street Journal might be a new dog in these parts, but this is an old trick: noun-possessive pronoun disagreement. The responsible parties got it right with Americans in the first clause, but it appears that the challenge of making a plural noun possessive was their undoing in the second clause. All of a sudden, we're thrown into confusion. Are we talking about a number of Americans or one person named American? If only one person, whose trucks does he or she love? The auto makers' trucks? The trucks of the Americans referred to in the first clause? (Not to be confused with our friend, American.) And why does this have such an effect on the lobbying policies of the auto makers? With the misplacement of one little apostrophe before an s instead of after it, witness the resulting chaos.

With this apocalyptic mis-apostrophe, the Wall Street Journal earns an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing? and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

*** (three stars) - I needed a shot just to look myself in the mirror this morning.

What's Wrong With This Picture: Cardinal and Gold Edition

Although we have a particular fondness for the University of Southern California due to a familial connection, our unwavering sense of justice impels us to publish this item. In addition, we cannot resist the irony of a sign welcoming scholarship recipients that prominently features a spelling error. We have little more to say on this matter; we believe it speaks for itself. Spend a few moments pondering and we believe you'll see what we mean. 'Fess up. You've got a smile on your face.

This error merits the following awards:

- What's Wrong With This Picture?
- C for Creative Spelling
- Oops! Is My Lazy Showing?

This error also earns the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish water bottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

A Tasty Treat from MSNBC.com

In honor of Thanksgiving, which is less than a week away, we invite you to feast yourselves on the following delicious headline, which we found on MSNBC.com: "Where did all the Zune's go?"

We know that you, discriminating reader, are easily able to identify the error in this headline. It is not you, but the simpleton sitting next to you, that we address. Dear simpleton, dear charming dolt; you, who cannot remember that a word is pluralized in English with the addition of an s (and in some cases es) and made possessive with the addition of 's--and never the other way around--you give the American character its particular tang. You, and whoever is responsible for the publication of this headline.

It should be noted that this is an AP article; however, the headline appears to have been created by the good folks at MSNBC.com. (For example, the articles on the AP and Yahoo websites are both titled, "Zune 80 in short supply.") Thus, we declare the AP to be fully absolved in this matter; further, in the spirit of goodwill and charity inspired by Thanksgiving, we hereby grant the AP one (1) Get Out of Snark Free card. The next time we catch the AP napping (which will likely be next Thursday, about 30 minutes after dinner concludes), we will keep it to ourselves. However, we feel obliged to make an example of MSNBC.com (Thanksgiving is after all a sort of Puritan holiday), so we will award them with an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing? and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

***** (five stars) - Whaaahhaa? Whodrankshaaallllthershcotch?

What's Wrong with This Picture: Special Video Edition

Here's a special video edition of What's Wrong with this Picture, brought to you by Mexicana Airlines. This commercial was shown on Saturday, October 27, 2007, on Fox Sports West in the mid-afternoon time slot.

**3:25 p.m. Note - we are currently experiencing technical difficulties with the video. Please be patient. We have been informed by YouTube that some monkeys are working on the problem.**

**3:49 p.m. Problem fixed! We believe. Thank you, monkeys.**

**Saturday, November 17, 2007, Update: Apparently YouTube was highly offended by Mexicana's error and has pulled the video content from its site. We say apparently because they did not offer us any explanation at all, so we are forced to draw our own conclusions. They do not seem to have the same sense of humor about these things that we do.**



Here's a still photo too, just for laughs:



Resisting the urge to rant and rave about all the problems in the world a simple spell-check can prevent, we have spent some time trying to dream up how this special spelling error occurred. Here are some of our ideas:

- "Fligth" is a new term created by Mexicana's promotions department to reward passengers taking their eighth flight this year. It is pronounced flyd-th (like heighth).

- The commercial is in actuality a secret message being sent from Max to 99 in conjunction with the search for the Tequila Mockingbird.

- Those crafty ad folks at Mexicana were trying to garner a spot on The Grammar Wall of Shame in the misguided belief that all publicity is good publicity. (To clarify, this belief is misguided only because they fail to realize that a spot on The Grammar Wall of Shame is actually equivalent to no publicity at all.)

While any of these options is a possibility, this spelling screw-up is most likely the result of an astonishing lack of effort and initiative on the part of a member or members of the professional writing world. Thus, you witness the birth of a new designation for this type of error: Phoning It In. In addition to being the first recipient of this designation, Mexicana Airlines has earned a C for Creative Spelling, an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing, and the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

Oh dear...

We discovered this flat-out faceplant on foxsports.com in an AP article titled, um, "After 104 years, Havard sheds light on football." (emphasis ours)

As you can see, astute reader, we didn't get very far before we found something alarming. We would like to believe that this titular trip-up is a tribute to the dialect of the citizens of fair Cambridge; we would like to believe it, but we don't.

Our dear friends at the AP can add to their many accolades and accomplishments the following awards from The Grammar Wall of Shame:
C for Creative Spelling
Oops! Is My Lazy Showing?

They have also earned the following Drunken Proofreading rating:
**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish water bottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

In which we take a short break from flogging the AP

We'd like to thank Grady W. for bringing this article-noun disagreement to our attention.

Grady found this error in a Times Online (UK) article titled, "Police push for charges against Madeleine McCann's mother as case goes to prosecutor":

"She would also face a charge of concealing a Madeleine’s body." (emphasis ours)

As a proper noun, Madeleine does not require an article. If the sentence were talking about Madeleine cookies, the singular article a might be appropriate; however, it is not yet a crime to hide a cookie, so the sentence would be illogical. This mistake is doubly shameful because it takes a subject that is grim and awful and makes it...silly. We trust that the good folks at The Times will be more vigilant in the future.

This gaffe merits an "Oops! Is my lazy showing?" and earns the following Drunken Proofreading rating:
**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

This one's a dilly!

Let's just say we've seen ESPN.com's lazy, and it's not pretty.

We found this article-subject disagreement snafu in an article titled, "Oregon State's Stroughter expects to play at Cincy":

"The Beavers opened their season last Thursday night with a 24-7 victory at home against Utah, testing the arms of a competing sophomore QBs Sean Canfield and Lyle Moevao." (emphasis ours)

The indefinite article a does not belong here because a) the sentence refers to more than one quarterback, and b) both quarterbacks are sophomores. (It should also be noted that it is unlikely that both arms of either quarterback were tested. We admit, the very thought makes us giggle.) In short, there is no excuse for the presence of this a.

At first glance, this appears to be a simple case of Oops! Is my lazy showing? However, we noticed that a line at the end of the article indicates, "Information from The Associated Press was used in this report." Out of what some might call a morbid curiosity, we did a little digging and found the original AP story, and what to our wondering eyes should appear? No, not what you might think - but we did find the errant sentence, identical to the one found in the ESPN article.

Dear reader, we wonder if you fully understand the implications of this discovery. We are only beginning to grasp it ourselves. Here is what evidently occurred: the AP writer wrote the original sentence, which his/her editor failed to notice. ESPN got the story from the AP wire and assigned their own writer to the story. He or she then (it is to be assumed) did their own research. Please hold on--it's about to get really ugly: the hapless ESPN writer excerpted chunks of the AP article (which we know is done all the time), including the questionable sentence, but apparently did not read it carefully enough to detect the error. This means that at least four people (and possibly more) looked at this sentence and found it acceptable for publication.

We probably don't need to tell you that an error of this magnitude is in a category all its own: We Are (Almost) Speechless. It is now 11:30 a.m. We will be hysterical until 11:45 a.m.

Why mess with something that's obviously working?

Right on the heels of the previous entry, we've found the following item in an article titled, "Another Cuban custody fight simmers":

"The facts are different this time around, and neither the U.S. government nor the Cuban-exile community, burned by its negative portrayal during the Elian case, have a desire to repeat the past." (emphasis ours)

Like the previous entry, this is a tricky case of subject-verb disagreement where the language would seem to indicate that the verb should reflect plural subjects. However, the tip-off is the use of neither/nor. The use of these words indicates that we are talking about neither one subject nor another - these are singular. If you need further proof, the sentence could be rephrased, using clearly singular subjects, to read, "...neither one has a desire..." or "...neither party has a desire..." without changing the meaning. On the other hand, you would never write, "...neither party have a desire..." (Just lie to us, ok?)

As this is the second time today we've found the AP to be guilty of this infraction, we feel compelled to give them an Oops! Is My Lazy Showing? In addition, they have earned the following Drunken Proofreading rating:

**** (four stars) - Yesh, I take thish waterbottle everywhere I go. It'sh water. No, you can't have any.

(Repeat offenses merit stiffer penalties.)

More AP tomfoolery...

Yahoo Sports and foxsports.com both show this error in an AP story, which is titled "South Carolina's Mitchell suspended for first game" and "Mitchell suspended for season opener," respectively:

"The suspension also were announced on Spurrier's Web site for Gamecock fans, www.spurrierhbc.com." (emphasis ours)

A simple case of subject-verb disagreement in the passive voice. Subject-verb disagreement is a very common and completely understandable error for writers/speakers whose first language is not English*. It is far less understandable for native speakers, who generally have an intuitive grasp of the strange subtleties of our language culled from years of speaking/listening/reading. Regardless of their tongues of origin, we expect a higher standard from professional writers/copy editors working in the English language.

This error falls under the category of "Oops! Is my lazy showing?" and earns the following Drunken Proofreading rating:
*** (three stars) - I needed a shot just to look myself in the mirror this morning.

*It should be noted, we give a resounding bravo! to those who learn English as a second language. We have the utmost respect and admiration for you. It is not for the faint of heart!