Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Yo! To my Peeps at Portfolio.com...You Gots Some 'Splainin' To Do....

A few days ago I posted an entry about a photograph (see above) that was associated with an article about the price of gold futures in relation to the (first) rate cut by the Fed...

I happened to notice it only because the Google News page that cited the article happened to have a thumbnail of this very photo beside it and the two didn't seem to fit...and I thought to myself: "This is kinda weird...let me check it out."

So I did and what you see above is what I saw...and that was two days ago...and the photo is STILL there...

See for yourself (assuming you didn't catch my entry from two days ago):

Makes me wonder...are these people (at these so-called media outlets) a) visually impaired; b) careless; c) trying to be "funny"; d) trying to sabotage the entity that employs them by making them out to be utterly ridiculous vis a vis things such as this? e) all of the above; f) and I know this is not considered "P.C." but are they (dare I say) stupid?

Meaning do they have an IQ which is equal to their age subtracted from their shoe size (yes, that is right...your output from that equation should be a negative number)...

I thought it was bizarre, possibly funny, definitely weird and completely idiotic a few days ago...

My opinion today is something slightly more negative than all of the above put together multiplied by the square of the sum total of the collective shoe size of each component member of the combined journalistic and editorial staff of (Conde Nast) Portfolio.com.

If you look closely you see that the obviously lazy staff at Portfolio.com blatantly pilfered the article from the newswire given the fact that they had to give credit to the original entity that wrote the story, in this case, Associated Press.

I'm imagining someone sitting behind a computer whose single and sole purpose in life is to pull stories as they come on to the newswire...they then do a cut and paste and they decide it is relevant and appropriate to paste a photo of a black man in the article, which, BY THE WAY, clearly doesn't go with the article...maybe they were trying to communicate something subliminally...but how can we really be sure what they meant to convey?

I'm not a mind-reader...

I don't get it...am I missing something?

All I want to know is how do these two things go together?

Doesn't anyone check their work any more? Don't these people have someone looking over their work before it goes on a major website backed by one of the biggest modern publishing entities?

I am really curious to know how stuff like this happens...

Seems like there is more than mere carelessness at work here...I haven't quite figured out what else to attribute it to but give me a bit more time to ponder this and I will let you know what else I come up with...

In the meanwhile, here's a photo of something that epitomizes carelessness and lack of oversight:





One relates to paper products; The other one doesn't move...




This one's a bit tough to figure out...

I'm not sure if I need to be annoyed with the journalist (who submitted the article and is therefore the person who ultimately gets credit for the article vis a vis the byline) or do I need to be irritated with the source of the error (in this case, IHRSA, the huge fitness industry trade association)???


I'm referring to the article inset providing the health statistics as reported by Dana Flavelle of the Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/) with the specific item at the center of the debate being the use of the word "stationery" when referring to bikes (in a gym).


Fitness facts

Size of fitness club market in Canada: $1.8 billion a year.

Number of clubs: 4,900

Number of members: 4.5 million.

Most popular month to sign new members: January.

Median club price: $150 to join, $55 a month to belong (U.S.) *

Most popular equipment: Free weights, stationery bikes, treadmills and exercise classes.

Most popular activities: Personal training, aerobics, kickboxing and yoga.

* No figures available for Canadian marketplace.

Source: International Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Assn.



Side note: kinda makes the Canadian fitness industry seem puny when compared to that in the U.S. but then again that isn't an apples-to-apples comparison...more like comparing a watermelon to a pea in terms of size of overall market (or the other way around)...but I digress...read on, please....


Stationery has to do with paper or paper related products.


Stationary refers to something which is in a fixed position or that which does not move.

Maybe there is a line of bikes manufactured by Hallmark???

Nah...probably not :-)

Maybe I'm having one of those kick-the-dog kind of days that force me to drill down into minute detail on seemingly insignificant things...

Shouldn't I be home watching the Presidential Debate?

Maybe my ass should be at the gym on a stationary (not stationery) bike...

I must admit I feel a small amount of guilt for calling out Ms. Flavelle and/or IHRSA for their seemingly innocuous mistake or their lack of attention to detail...

Then again I made a vow to stand up for the freedom of those of us who are literate because I believe in the right to be able to peruse the contents of any legitimate or quasi-legitimate journalistic site and have the words that we read be written with correct grammar and correct spelling...

In any event, what's done is done...to their credit, at least the Toronto Star is not such a bunch of arrogant holier-than-thou ivory tower types such that they actually invite readers to provide feedback with respect to any typos and/or corrections...

Makes me feel even more guilty for kicking the (theoretical) dog...sort of..

Maybe I do need to drag myself to the gym and pedal into nowhere on a stationary (not stationery) bike...yup...think I'm going to go do that now...

Good night y'all.



Monday, January 28, 2008

If the photo doesn't fit you must NOT acquit!!!

After about 20 seconds of serious internal debate as to whether or not to post this entry, I decided to do it anyway even though it has absolutely nothing to do with spelling per se.

I was scrolling mindlessly down the Google News Page when I stumbled upon a photo that had absolutely nothing to do with the associated article(s).

See for yourself:
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/ap/2008/01/28/gold-platinum-futures-hit-new-records


You can draw your own conclusions as I don't think that words are even necessary....I must say that I am utterly baffled as to how the photo goes with the article...

You decide :-)

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Shouldn't you be able to spell if you are a (purported) journalist???

Growing up, I took spelling very seriously...in fact I am proud to say that I later went on to become a spelling champion (short-lived spelling career but a victorious one nevertheless)...

I guess I could never really get it out of my system such that now, as an adult, I have the uncanny ability to notice bad spelling when I am not even consciously looking for it....

Disclaimer: I am not a publisher and I am not a proofreader...I am merely an average Internet denizen just like the rest of you out there. I don't like to point out spelling flaws. It doesn't give me any particular sense of joy, satisfaction, etc.

In fact, quite the contrary!!!

I find it sad, to be honest with you.

It's easy to commit the occasional spelling mistake especially with the prevalence of text messages and internet shorthand...anyone can do it especially in our modern day lives that move at the speed of light and we have to crank out our thoughts and emotions so quickly...it happens! It is part of our collective technological experience.

The thing that drives me crazy, however, is when so-called journalists and journalistic sites with LOTS of capital and resources publish material on the internet without taking a second to ensure that they are doing so through the use of proper spelling.

In my opinion there is absolutely no excuse for it. With all of the resources at their disposal why is it that they can publish an article with bad spelling? Doesn't someone check it before it goes up on the internet for the rest of the world to read? Assuming they are using Microsoft WORD or some other word-processing application, don't they have a built-in spell-checker upon which they can rely? Or is it simply because they are too lazy? Perhaps they just don't care? For the myopic or those suffering from astigmatism perhaps it is merely a function of the need to update an eyeglass prescription...the possibilities are endless but it all boils down to the simple fact that if you are a site with major national or worldwide brand identity, you should be able to spell properly before you publish material all over the internet....

The aforementioned is the fundamental premise based upon which I have decided to start this blog.
To the extent that I am able, I solemnly promise that I will point out the exact spelling violation(s) as they should happen to come across my field of vision and I will make sure to also include the source of the violation, the date published, the associated link to the source of the violation, and the duration of the violation (before someone notices it independently and decides to correct it, removes it, etc.). In addition to this data I will also include the correct spelling that SHOULD HAVE appeared had the violator chosen to pay attention to what was being published before committing said violation.

Catching spelling mistakes may seem like a pretty insignificant thing when viewed in the context of the macro sense of life and quite frankly it is...in the big picture sense this doesn't matter even a little bit...

However, to the extent that effective communication is important and as long as information is being transmitted via the internet (especially via theoretically legitimate and hard-nosed journalistic sites), it should be done using proper spelling (and grammar but I am just pointing out bad spelling at the moment)...otherwise those who perpetuate the bad spelling by publishing it and those who read the poorly spelled communication are equally responsible for creating a linguistic anarchy of sorts.

With that soliloquy I will inaugurate my blog with the winner of today's bad spelling prize...

That rare and dubious distinction goes to Forbes.com and the specific violation (pointed out in huge bold red font) is as follows:

2008 Software Predicitions



Sorry, Forbes.com editors and/or journalists....the proper spelling of the word is PREDICTIONS...
You have placed an extra "i" between the letter "c and the letter "t".

Today is Sunday, January 27th 2008 and it appears that this particular example of poor spelling has been on the internet for 2 days thus far...It is further evident that during this 2 day period the spelling error has gone unnoticed (by someone at Forbes.com)....

I can't even bring myself to watch the video clip to find out what you have to say about the outlook for the software industry in 2008 because I don't know what the hell a "predicition" is....I can't find a reference to it in the dictionary...

What if I were a random child (more likely teenager) doing research on the internet? I would think:

a) there is such a word as "predicitions" in the English language but for some reason that is unknown to me I am not able to find it in the dictionary so maybe I will decide that the fault lies with my dictionary (or even worse than that perhaps it says something about me but being a child or teenager I lack the personal development that is required to take a introspective look at my own psyche so for the moment I am going take the easy route and will just pin it on the dictionary)
OR

b) I would think that a careless person with poor typing skills, spelling skills or some combination thereof made the entry on the Forbes.com site which would lead me to think that incompetent people work at Forbes.com either in the department that writes articles or in the department that posts articles or in some department in between....

Call me crazy but neither one of these is a particularly good scenario if you are Forbes.com let alone the poor confused child/teenager!!!

By the way, even as I am typing my entry for this blog every time I type the word "predicition" or "predicitions" my built-in spell-checker underlines the mystery word with a dashed red line which causes me to pay attention to it and gives me the option to either correct it or ignore it...you would think that a similar thing happened to someone at Forbes.com but it seems quite evident that they chose to IGNORE it!!!

I invite you to embark upon this journey of proper spelling along with me by forwarding any violations that you may have occasion to notice especially those that are committed by major news sites or internet sites that may have a journalistic association, reputation, leaning, bent, etc.

I will endeavor to post the violations in my blog with the necessary corrections so that we can collectively strive to create a place on the internet where proper spelling is appreciated and encouraged.

Have a wonderful day wherever you may be!!!

Signing off,
Your Champion of Proper Spelling