On 4/18/2010 1:02 PM, Dan Goodman wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> George Shirley wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/18/2010 6:42 AM, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Proofreading should always be done by two people, one reading
>> aloud,>> the
>>>> other checking the words. That apoostrophe s my story and capital
>> I>> apostrophe m sticking to it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, next time I have to proofread a technical manual I will call
>>> you and you can read it aloud while I check the words. I am always
>>> careful about the wording because my industrial clients would go
>>> ballistic if I misspelled anything or inadvertently put a racist
>>> statement in the manual.
>>>
>> IMHO, it was obviously just a mistake, because three things happened:
>> somebody made a typo, then the wrong choice was made when the spell
>> check popped up the dialog box with suggestions - and thirdly, the
>> proofreader(s) missed it.
>
> It's also possible that someone relied ENTIRELY on automatic spell
> check.
>
>> No matter who or what is ultimately to blame
>> for it, is irrelevant; no human being in their right mind would do
>> something like that intentionally - and attempting to sue the spell
>> check software writers would be rather silly, wouldn't it?
>>
>> Besides, none of the above are uncommon mistakes so why it has been
>> interpreted as a 'racist statement' (and published on more than one
>> news website) just goes to show (again IMHO), that people have become
>> way oversensitive to these 'silly mistakes' - and it must have been a
>> slow news day too.
>
> I suspect that the publisher's response -- sort of apology, but saying
> they don't see why it was such a big deal -- had something to do with
> it.
>
The local paper does that, everything is computerize there. I get a kick
out of looking for humorous typos every day. DW does the crossword
puzzle, I do the re-editing.