Sign of the Times
Recently, New York Times Magazine had a doozy. Every time an article referred to a D-list actor named James Deen, it changed his name to James Dean (see article on the right). Oddly, it only happened when the writer used Deen's full name. This despite the fact that a second reference, which was "Deen," followed (very closely). Now you know the writer didn't do this - it must have happened during fact-checking and proofreading.
So this tells us, boys and girls, that either someone was asleep at the wheel, or that New York Times Magazine was using the all-powerful spell check instead of a human proofreader.
Maybe the powers-that-be don't care that they look like idiots. But I remember a day when the New York Times was held up as the pinnacle of journalism, a true goal to aspire to as a writer and editor.
I have a lot of friends who work at that newspaper, and they are absolutely fabulous at their jobs. But they are also stretched to the max in the pursuit of the tightest margin, rather than the tightest article.
While I love the Wild Wild West that has become Internet "journalism" because it's given us a lot of fun and funky writing, I don't think that means we should ignore the basic rules that set the foundation for writers. And that goes double for print publications.
James Dean the icon should not be mistaken for James Deen the "porn star." I guess we should just be thankful it didn't turn into Paula Deen. She would not be amused, ya'll.