If readers get irritated at typos contained in their newspaper or magazine, just imagine what it does to the publisher who must tolerate and try to prevent them, or the editor who's supposed to notice and rectify them, or the reporter or staffer who made them?
We sincerely apologize for our past and future typos - especially the misspelling of names, which has always been considered a real no-no in the newspaper industry.
Television and radio broadcasters can mispronounce name after name with no serious backlash. In fact, there is a popular, veteran television news anchor in a nearby city who has never met a sentence she couldn't stumble over.
However, the fact the print media throws it out there into the Public Domain printed on actual paper in front of God and everybody makes them a sitting duck when typos occur. After all, the readers hold the smoking gun in their hands.
In today's high-tech world too many reporters and editors have become spoiled by their computer's spell-check. Spell-check is lame because it doesn't and can't distinguish in context names, proper nouns, or the many misleading words in the English language like led and lead, red and read, their and they're, its and it's, etc.
Reporters, editors and other writers make mistakes for a variety of reasons, including carelessness, a lack of intelligence, a reckless tendency to assume, a lack of proper training in grammar and spelling, and - probably the most viable reason - haste.
We all know haste makes waste, but only those who've lived it can appreciate that typos can and often do occur when the newspaper or magazine is on deadline, with the press operators, the entire distribution system and thousands of readers relying on the fact that the deadline be met.
In many instances, meeting deadlines may be the reason a certain article or entire page was not even read by the editors or proof-readers so assigned.
Yes, we labor to try to correct the likelihood of typos occurring. We can chastise the perpetrator and we know of some newspapers and magazines who regularly terminate frequent violators who fail to improve and who just don't seem to get the importance of continually striving to produce that perfect, error-free product.