Why bother?

A state-run Egyptian newspaper doctored a photo from the recent talks between Israel and Palestinian leaders. The question is, why? The Egyptians were not leading the talks. The talks were not even about Egypt. So why would the Egyptian paper change the photo to put President Hosni Mubarak in front of President Obama? It just seems silly to me.

That's not a word

Just found an interesting error on the official site of the Boston Red Sox. It should say "Surgery might be inevitable for Pedroia's foot." I'm not sure what the headline is implying. Anybody know what "sugery" means?

Read any guy's lit lately?

Just read a great piece by NPR's Linda Holmes. The title of the column is "Women are not Marshmallow Peeps, and other reasons there's no 'chick lit.'" The best line, IMHO, is this:

But at this point, I think the only solution is to stay away from the term "chick lit" as much as humanly possible, because it's become a term that means "by and about women, and not something you need to take seriously...."

And her other great point: Why don't we categorize books about men as "guy's lit"? Just something to ponder.

Jobs in journalism growing

Jobs in journalism growing

Its a cute blog

I found this today. It's got some interesting stuff. (And yes, I know I left out the apostrophe in the headline. I did it on purpose.)

Get the lead out

Why am I surprised by anything anymore? I spotted a very silly error in Scott Turow's op-ed column in today's New York Times. Turow writes:

The measure was never ratified by the Legislature, while her offer of $1,000 lead directly to her conviction for bribery in the Illinois courts.

The past tense of "lead" is "led." It's not an error that spell-check will catch, so you have to actually proofread your work. "What's proofreading?" you ask? It's a long-forgotten skill that, if practiced correctly, might save you from embarrassment.