So I settled down to read the papers this past weekend, attempting to enlighten myself and keep current with the news. As I read on, I stumble upon a few grammatical glitches, which of course immediately interrupts my flow, but I continue anyway. But then it happens again.
In its initial occurrence, it is easy to forgive it and let it pass as human error, but when it occurs repeatedly we then start to furl the eyebrows.
I simply believe that there’s no excuse for the submission of sub par articles, riddled with minor errors that should’ve been picked up by spell check. And the fact that these articles are scrutinized by various pairs of eyes before landing on the pages makes it even more unforgivable. How is it possible that an editor and a copy editor can both let these things slip? Spelling mistakes are intolerable, especially in an age of advanced technology. It is incumbent upon every journalist to look up any word whose spelling he/she is unsure of.
A couple of weeks ago I read an article by a seasoned entertainment editor of a popular daily publication. I was very disturbed by the number of minor, yet important, errors found in that article. That the editor was seasoned was even more disconcerting to me. Is it complacency? Do people not take pride in their work that they allow all these avoidable errors bring them to such disrepute?
Surely, issues such as spelling and punctuation are those should guide every journalistic rule. Every journalist ought to know that a simple misuse, improper punctuation or misspelling of any word could easily thwart the intended meaning of a particular message.
Why then is it that this is paid very little attention? It is, after all, the primary objective of the communicator to ensure that his/her intended message is clearly understood by the receiver.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
