Sometimes the news is a little less than accurate. Not necessarily in a malicious way, but by journalists who don’t truly understand what it is they’re saying.
I just saw the headline “AIDS TURNS A CHILD INTO AN ORPHAN EVERY 14 SECONDS.” Now it seems unlikely to me that AIDS works like clockwork, waiting 14 seconds, then killing somebody else. But that’s what the headline said. For that matter, it seems that it’s the same child being turned into an orphan over and over again.
Sucks to be him (or her).
Now, we all know what they’re trying to say. But is it too much to ask for trained professionals (most of whom have degrees in this field) to know what it is they’re saying? And to do it accurately?
Some other headlines that caught my eye...
“U.S. TO TRY MIDEAST DIPLOMACY AGAIN.” Ooh, that’s new. Has there been a time in the last 30 years when that wasn’t true?
“ARMED GANGS THREATEN MEXICAN TURTLES.” Do I really need to say anything about that? The visual alone keeps me cracking up.
“RUSSIAN SPACE ENGINEERS EAGER TO JOIN U.S.” Well, quite possibly, but I think the story meant to say they’re wanting to work with NASA on the manned Mars mission.
“DOCTORS REMOVE 175 POUND TUMOR FROM WOMAN.” Now, there’s nothing wrong grammatically with that headline. I’m just thinking “OUCH!!!!!” Her tumor weighed more than me! After the surgery, she only weighed 88 pounds. Damn.
“FUEL CELL TECHNOLOGY HAS MILITARY USES.” And what technology have we developed that doesn’t?
“NEW INTERNET VIRUS SPREADING FAST.” As opposed to all of those that spread really, really slowly?
Well, enough news for now. I’m going to read a book and catch some shut-eye.
Remember - if you’re too drunk to drive, take somebody else’s car.
Catch rule revision
1 hour ago