Shear madness

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Thu Jul 03, 2003 11:16 pm

AP: KILGORE, Texas … Some thought a tornado had blown through
the neighborhood. Many thought they were being bombed or
perhaps a gas line had ruptured. Other local residents could only shake their heads as they
described the shear terror when a fireworks warehouse exploded
near their homes Thursday afternoon.*****
Seems like every story I get with "sheer" in it has it spelled "shear." What's up with that?

SusanV · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 9:25 am

Think of it as the reason spellcheckers will never replace us. Built-in job security!

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:37 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by SusanV:
Think of it as the reason spellcheckers will never replace us. Built-in job security!<hr></blockquote>spellcheckers don't get catch this, because both words exist.spellcheckers don't catch "lead" used as the past tense of the verb, either -- an error i see even more often than sheer/shear.still, the biggest problem i see with spellcheckers is that so many people refuse to use them. technology will continue the trend of making true copy editing by humans an endangered career choice.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 3:05 pm

Actually, Wayne, to expand on that, what I see as the real threat to the "future" of copy editing is the lack of interest many top-level editors have in what good copy editors are supposed to do.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 4:51 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Bumfketeer:
Actually, Wayne, to expand on that, what I see as the real threat to the "future" of copy editing is the lack of interest many top-level editors have in what good copy editors are supposed to do.<hr></blockquote>I agree. At many papers, the heds are written by assigning editors or designers who don't read beyond the lede. Text doesn't get much attention beyond someone remembering to spellcheck. As long as the white space around the ads gets filled, that's good enough at many papers. If the reporters' handlers and the designers can do that, who needs copy editors?Many top-level editors don't want what we would consider good copy editing, because that takes time and might displease newsroom stars.

SusanV · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 9:25 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:
spellcheckers don't get catch this, because both words exist.spellcheckers don't catch "lead" used as the past tense of the verb, either -- an error i see even more often than sheer/shear.<hr></blockquote>
Um, that was my point. I really wanted to come up with a smartalecky response involving its and it's--which is by far the most common sound-alike fix I have to make, believe it or not!--or to, too and two, but my brain is on holiday today and I couldn't do it, so I just played it straight. Too straight, I guess!What amazes me more is how many of my desk colleagues don't even run spellcheck. I know because I routinely do it in the slot.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 9:53 pm

Sad but true, Wayne.

Dyslexic · **Posted:** Fri Jul 04, 2003 10:51 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by SusanV:
Think of it as the reason spellcheckers will never replace us. Built-in job security!<hr></blockquote>I suppose this comment is only tangentially related to the thread, but there are several projects underway to develop context-sensitive spell-checkers. While the current generation of spell-checkers can identify words like "spellchecker" that don't exist in a predefined list, the context-sensitive spell-checkers will have the ability to catch homonym errors.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2003 12:59 pm

and then there are the computers that spit out headlines, like this one on Yahoo's news page this morning:Police Station Injures Several Iraqis[ July 05, 2003: Message edited by: jjmoney62 ]

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sat Jul 05, 2003 2:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by SusanV:

Um, that was my point. <hr></blockquote>My mistake.Yes, we have spellcheckers (programs, not people) that are gaining in complexity but which accomplish nothing if reporters, their editors and even copy editors disdain them. Programs spew headlines and decide online story play based on popularity or other set preferences. Designers, doing work previously done by copy editors, crank out pages using layout templates. Ever use Windows' grammar check? It rejects much of what reporters consider fine writing. Maybe copy editors' job security will depend on ignoring grammar check, dictionaries and stylebooks but using spellcheck.[ July 06, 2003: Message edited by: Wayne Countryman ]

SusanV · **Posted:** Mon Jul 07, 2003 3:38 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:
Ever use Windows' grammar check? It rejects much of what reporters consider fine writing. Maybe copy editors' job security will depend on ignoring grammar check, dictionaries and stylebooks but using spellcheck.[ July 06, 2003: Message edited by: Wayne Countryman ]<hr></blockquote>
Grammar check has to be the most ridiculous joke foisted upon the public yet, at least so far as "helpful" computer tools are concerned. It's the first thing I disabled.I'd be happy to ignore at least a third of our stylebook, for sure. Not to mention the vast majority of NW. Wayne, I think you're on to something!

Testy Copy Editors

Shear madness

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links