In reading a story from Time Magazine tonight, I noticed that the author claimed when a currency was devalued 100%, that meant all of a sudden 1,000 units were only worth 10 units. Well, actually, it means it’s completely worthless, regardless of the amount, so the statement that 1,000 is now worth 10 is in reality accurate, because both 1,000 of them and 10 of them are worth the same amount: 0. Maybe this is what the writer meant all along, and he just wanted to see if we were paying attention, and then smart enough to figure out his logic problem. That’s probably it, since Time Magazine wouldn’t just publish brain farts, now would they?
There is however, another, simpler explanation for this oversight, or error, or whatever you’d like to refer to it as: This is what happens when you don’t bother to hire a copy editor: You end up looking stupid. But this article was on the internet, linked through Yahoo! News, and that’s how I saw it. I read it, laughed heartily at the simple math mistake, figured out how it could still be a true statement nonetheless (due to both amounts being worth zero, so technically, he could have said 1,000 was now worth 10 or 1,000,000,000, because when they have no value, it doesn’t matter how many you have, they’re still worth the same amount: zero), and looked down at the comments section to see what people would make of it. Well, some people caught it, and they commented on it. And that’s when it hit me: This must be the new, high-tech method of copy editing!
Here’s what I mean: Most publishers, in order to save money, have gotten rid of copy editor positions, trusting that the writers will fix all their own mistakes with spell-check, etc. But the truth is, most writers miss their own copy editing mistakes until after they’ve published their work. I think it’s because they’re too close to the writing: They know what it’s supposed to say, so they see it saying that, and they simply fail to see the mistakes. Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows I make plenty of errors, too. I fix them when I find them, but without a separate person to copy edit for you, your writing will be riddled with errors; that’s just the way it is. And believe me, while I miss a lot of my own copy editing errors, I immediately see the ones in others’ writing.
So by publishing an article online first, before it’s put into print in a paper magazine, they can simply look at the comments section to find out all their errors, for readers will catch them and make fun of them. So in this way, they can get their writing copy edited free of charge by the internet news readers. Smart, huh? But they still end up looking dumb to some people, so maybe they ought to just spring for that copy editor after all. Because when a major publication makes a stupid error like this, it could devalue their credibility by 100%.
Here’s the insightful, if not thoroughly intelligent, story (No fair fixing the math error! It’s in the 6th paragraph down, half way through the paragraph. And by the way, I know I am jumping to conclusions that this is a typo; it’s possible this writer is not very good at math, or that he’s an idiot. I’m just assuming he’s not an idiot since he’s writing for Time Magazine. But that might just be an error of mine right there.):
