The state of affairs in grammar/spelling, within the news media:
Two news media outlets posted headlines yesterday saying almost the same thing:
“so-and-so has just warned people in his fire devastated neighborhood that ‘Looters will be shot on site’…”
They were referring to a person posting a warning msg either on their property, or on social media.
Normally, when a news media outlet recognizes that a word is misspelled or misused by the original person (whom they are reporting on), they use this device: (sic), to indicate they know there is a problem with the original spelling.
It means “we know this is incorrect, but we’re quoting the source directly, and do not want to change their words, etc.”
The problem is, the two news outlets didn’t use “(sic)”, which indicates to me, the persons (i.e., the news headline editors) employed by the news outlets that are creating the headlines for the articles they are posting online, ARE NOT aware that the person that originally said “Looters will be shot on site” was using “site” incorrectly, and should have used that other word that sounds just like “site”, but is spelled differently.
“SIGHT” – also known as having to do with one’s vision, not location.
Sorry, rant over. It just boggles my mind that newspapers/news outlets supposedly employ journalists, and editors who go to school for four years especially to study stuff like this (spelling, grammar, etc.).
Ok, rant is officially over.
Shaking my head.
😱🙄😉🤓
🧐🤨📰📝⌨️💻🖥🤨🧐
🙁
