Goodbye to a legend

I came of age after Walter Cronkite had already retired as anchor of the evening news, but I still appreciate what he did. You can view his greatest moments and see for yourself.

I really enjoyed the appreciation in today's New York Times by Verlyn Klinkenborg. Here's my favorite part:

Some deaths end only a life. Some end a generation. Walter Cronkite’s death ends something larger and more profound. He stood for a world, a century, that no longer exists. His death is like losing the last veteran of a world-changing war, one of those men who saw too much but was never embittered by it. Walter Cronkite’s gift was to talk to us about what he saw, and we are very lucky to have been able to listen.

Unfortunate, but all too true.

Thanks, Uncle Walter, for all you gave journalism.

Which is it?

I enjoyed a recent scathing book review in The New York Times. Janet Maslin really took it to Chris Anderson, author of "Free: The Future of a Radical Price," and Ellen Ruppel Shell, author of "Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture."

But Maslin made an error that made my crankiness rear its ugly head. The reviewer chided both authors because they referred to the same story but told it in different ways. I kept waiting for Maslin to tell readers which retelling was correct. She didn't. In the journalism business, that's called a "hole" -- a question that should have been answered but wasn't. I also like to refer to it with the technical term "bad reporting."

The case in point involves a research study by Dan Ariely. According to Maslin, the books she reviewed had the story as follows:

According to “Cheap” he offered his subjects a choice between the 1-cent Kiss and a 26-cent Ferrero Rocher hazelnut. At those prices the test subjects were divided 40 percent to 40 percent, with 20 percent opting for neither. Then the prices came down by one penny each, and 90 percent of the subjects took the free chocolate. Only 10 percent chose the higher-priced brand.

And here's what Maslin says about "Free":

In its “Free” version the non-Kiss candy is a Lindt truffle initially priced at 15 cents while the Kiss cost a penny; 73 percent of subjects chose the truffle and 27 percent picked the Kiss, with nobody abstaining. Then the prices were lowered by 1 cent each, and 69 percent of the subjects chose the free Kiss.

So which story is correct? Well, after about five minutes of Google searching, I found out. The study, written by Kristina Shampanier and Nina Mazar, as well as Ariely, described TWO experiements. The first involved a Lindt truffle, as Anderson says, but he got the price wrong. It was originally 14 cents, not 15. The second involved a Ferrero Rocher, just as Shell said. And she got the prices right.

Good copy editors either send stories with holes back to the authors for fixing or fill the holes on their own. Today's lesson: Don't leave holes in stories. If you leave readers guessing after reading a story, they might not come back next time.

Great language blog

Found a great new language blog, Grammar Monkeys. Well, it's new to me. Don't know how "new" it is. It's by the Wichita Eagle's copy editors. Today's entry is about noun/pronoun agreement, which almost all my students need to work on.

The perils of proofreading while driving

Just moved into a lovely neighborhood with an unfortunately ugly sign. We have a beautiful stream, hundreds of trees and lots of grass. We also have a missing apostrophe and an unclear sentence. The Volkswagen Beetle-sized sign warns drivers not to park on the road that runs through the neighborhood. It ends with the following sentence:

Violators will be towed at owners expense.

I'm not sure what the sign's author means by "violators." To me, this means that the people violating the rule will be towed. Ouch! That sounds rather unpleasant and should act as quite a deterrent. But that can't be what the author means. Not unless the owners of this place are prone to violence. More likely, they're prone to typos. We're talking about the cars being towed. So why say "violators"? Why not say "violators' vehicles"? It has a nice ring to it, don't you think? I guess the author was in a hurry and had no time to hire a proofreader.

On to the missing apostrophe.

"Owners" is the plural form of "owner." It means more than one owner. So if someone parks in the wrong place, violators will be towed.

But who will pay for said towing? I'm not sure. I think it should be "owners' expense." The "s" followed by the apostrophe indicates possession by several owners. I did not use "owner's," which is singular, because "violators" implies that more than one owner is paying. One violator usually means one owner. Although one car could be owned by two or more people, one person probably does not own every car illegally parked on a road. I'm sure it could happen, but I don't anticipate it.

Apostrophes not only indicate possession, they also let readers know when a letter or letters have been removed. For instance, the apostrophe in "doesn't" replaces an "o." Don't use apostrophes to indicate plurals. As with any punctuation mark, when you see yourself using one, take a moment and ask yourself why. If you don't know, check your trusty grammar/punctuation guide. Here are a few good ones:

• Media Writer's Handbook: A Guide to Common Editing and Writing Problems, by George T. Arnold. The book includes chapters on the basics and loads of writing tips.
• Associated Press Stylebook, edited by Darrell Christian, Sally Jacobsen and David Minthorn. Includes a 41-page punctuation guide.
• Working with Words: A Handbook for Media Writers and Editors, by Brian S. Brooks, James L. Pinson and Jean Gaddy Wilson. Includes chapters on the basics, style, mechanics and writing.

You could call it that

Just found a great miscue in The New York Times. The story is about college basketball player Luke Harangody, who decided to return to Notre Dame for another year.

My paper copy had the following sentence:

That meant Harangody could work out for teams, attend the daft combine and receive feedback from N.B.A. executives on his draft status without forfeiting his N.C.A.A. eligibility.

I've never been to the draft combine, but I suppose it could be daft. Must I remind people that this is yet another error that was caused by checking spelling and not proofreading?

Words, words, words

Interesting column on words in today's New York Times.

It's not the number of words, it's the way we use them.

Another reason to learn punctuation

This punctuation error was worth about $1 million. Actually, it was worth $200, but that's a lot of money for a punctuation mark.

Either she was really nervous or she never took my class. Probably both.

For the record: A colon introduces things. A period is a stop. A comma is a pause.