Keep Clam and Proofread

I am writing about mistakes in writing, which in itself is fraught with risk. Because the first thing you're going to do as a reader is look for errors in my article on errors, so perhaps I should apologise right up front if you find any. I can only say mea culpa in advance, and add that I am not particularly taking a 'holier than thou' position, merely trying to illustrate how infuriating and diverting mistakes can be.

So, caveat out of the way, let's get started with a sweeping generalisation: Contemporary journalism, especially online, is riddled with grammatical and spelling errors. And such errors totally spoil the impact of a headline or the credibility or even readability of an article. Or all three.

As a qualified curmudgeon I have recently been on the lookout for examples of literary languidity (which is a word I just made up, before you comment), examples which showcase listlessness and carelessness in headlines and body copy. 

Why? Because I see such things on a daily basis, in fact so often now that it calls into question whether journalists and their sub-editors are even reading what they've written before they publish.

I decided therefore to start collecting a few of these examples to share with you by way of evidence. Much to my non-surprise I found more than enough in just a day of normal casual browsing. Had I maintained my vigil for a week I could have completed a whole compendium of crap, but I think the ones I showcase here today will be enough. 

Let's start with an error worthy of half a million comments, about the NHS and how many of its workers have had to pay around £500,000 for parking at one hospital trust alone. As you can see in the screenshot, the £500k is described as 'hald a million', because, presumably, the sub-editor is working from home during the pandemic and allowing his/her cat to walk across the keyboard. But then, it is from the Mirror, so what can you expect?

Also, hald a million what? Even the body copy doesn't say. Here in the UK we know it means GB pounds, but in other countries they may think it was pesos, or zloty.

Whatever the currency, the Mirror isn't paying its hacks enough, obviously.

Then there's the woman who 'has went' viral online, according to the Daily Record. This mistake is likely because the journalist had originally written that the woman 'has gone viral' and then changed it to 'went viral' but without fully deleting the original draft. 

I saw read this online earlier...

Easy to do, but does this illustrate the larger problem, which is that journalists online are under tremendous pressure to get stuff published as quickly as possible, to beat the other online organs to the finish line, and therefore to be the ones 'breaking' the story? (Just nod).

Back when I was a lad ('were a lad'- Ed.) newspapers were physical things made of actual paper, that came out daily, sometimes twice-daily. Although they still had publication deadlines to meet, there was a strict chain of editorial command which acted as an increasingly fine-mesh filter system to spot and correct mistakes before the presses started rolling.

In today's digital environment however, content is king, and having up-to-the minute stories is vital if your organ's online status is to be credible and clickable. But the pressure to get content online creates its own problems - the faster you rush something into 'print' the less time there is to proofread and the more chances of mistakes getting through.

Mistake been made, reader am bemused

Which is almost certainly what happened at the BBC a couple of days ago where a missing 'has' changes the tone of this piece to one of pidgin English, rather than the polished delivery we've come to expect from Auntie Beeb; see the clipping, and smirk.

Here are a few more from my casual collection...

Americans 'air' giving Trump low marks. Just as we are giving really low marks to the staff writers at Audioburst. Using spellcheck or apps such as Grammerly probably wouldn't pick this error up as 'air' is spelt correctly, and Americans are quite likely to air something, such as their opinions, or underwear. (Also, who is President Trump Low? I rest my [upper] case).

Meanwhile, DIY enthusiasts will be agog to learn that they can put up a shelf in just '30 minute.' (That said, here in the UK it is very common for people to say that they were doing '80 mile an hour' on the motorway, though this could be a peculiarly northern thing - I haven't heard it much here darn sarf).

But the missing 's' again turns the headline into pidgin English, or maybe it just reflects the way the DIY instructions are written: Take shelf. Mark shelf position on wall. Use spirit level, make straight. Drill holes. Slip drill bit onto thumb. Swear. Sit down, read stuff online. See article: 'Plant shelf takes 30 minute to make.' Pour wine.

Why you write it like this, huh?

Forbes, which should know better, turns a question into a statement, and it's not rhetorical. Once again the urge to publish quickly results in a headline that is rendered meaningless by the simple inclusion of an errant question mark. If it had started with, 'Why should you...' the interrogative would have made sense. As it is it's neither one thing or the other.

This just to hand...

Finally though, not a headline or copy error, just an incredibly sloppy piece of knee-jerk publishing, and again from the BBC. 

On Monday a classic motorcycle museum in Austria caught fire and was totally destroyed, along with the valuable collection of 200 bikes inside.

In its rush to get the story out it looks as though a hack has searched for 'motorcycle museum fire' and published the first story that came up, which was indeed about a disastrous motorcycle collection blaze - but from Birmingham in 2003. 

No spellcheck or app would pick that up, only a measured, diligent approach to journalism, which, in our hectic, competitive and breathless digital age, seems to be missing.

Now if you'll excuse me I must go and proofread what I've just written - about 15 times.

But wait, there's more! This just in...