Reading the news (or even your email) can be distressing to the point of despondency. It can also be fun. It’s especially fun when people say or write silly stuff, and the reporter or editor has to write [sic] after a misspelling or a stupid comment in the original transcript. Sic, usually placed in brackets, is short for the Latin phrase meaning “thus.” It’s used to indicate that a quoted passage, especially one containing an error or unconventional spelling, has been retained in its original form. Said more simply, it’s a way for an author or editor to point out it’s the person they’re quoting—not they—who put it exactly that way.
ADVERTISEMENT |
To be clear, I never want to be [sic]. Being [sic] means I forgot to hit the spell-check button before I put something in the pubic [sic] domain. (See? It can be funny!) It means I’ve been less than attentive to basic tenants [sic] of professionalism. It reflects poorly on me and really tests the patients [sic] of my readers. In some cases, it reflects a certain level of disrespect for my audience because it implies they’re not even important enough for me to spell-check before presenting an idea. At the very least, it indicates that I don’t have enough spare change to buy a pocket dictionary or access to dictionary.com.
I’m not saying I’m bettor [sic] than people who misspell things. I’m simply trying to point out that the one minute you save by not proofreading something costs you immeasurably in terms of your own personal brand equity. I saw a massage [sic] the other day where the author was exhorting people to do their diligence on companies before interviewing with them because “failing to do so can undermine your creditability [sic].” Hm. I’m thinking using “creditability” instead of “credibility” undermines your credibility more than not doing your diligence, no?
...the one minute you save by not proofreading something costs you immeasurably...
Take a look at your resume. Is it [sic]k? Are there misspellings? I know I’ve covered some basic mistakes in “Two Big Resume Writing Boo Boos,” but this mistake is the most basic of all. If your resume is riddled with misspellings, some anal-retentive hiring manager will notice and chuck it onto the reject pile. How about that email to your boss’s boss, where you’re recommending you need to confiscate [sic] your team better because their salaries are well below market rates? I’m betting that will have some impact on the decision your boss’s boss makes about your year-end confiscation [sic].
As our economy continues to transition to a world full of knowledge workers, people get [sic]ker and [sic]ker. Emails and pages fly at light speed across Crackberries [sic] and laptops. We spend more time in front of a screen than in front of our families. Our online personas begin to define us as individuals. If your persona is [sic]kly, that’s how the world will begin to perceive your performance.
And being [sic]k doesn’t only mean misspellings. It can also be the pure bastardization of our language. This includes using the wrong word. One of my all-time favorites? A memo that came from HR via email: They were trying to instruct us on proper interviewing techniques (essentially “do’s and don’ts”). One bullet point read: “When interviewing, don’t ask questions that are personnel [sic].” I couldn’t resist. I wrote back and asked “during all interviews, aren’t all questions about personnel?” They didn’t get the joke. Actually, after that initial email, they became the joke.
Please, for your own sake, take the extra couple of minutes to proofread your writing. If not, you’ll pay your pennants [sic, but Go Guardians!—yes, I’m a Cleveland fan) at sum [sic] point in your career.
As always, I submit these perspectives most hum billy (that’s a drunk from Dogpatch who sits on his porch and sings without articulating words) [sic].
Respectively [sic],
—Mike Figliuolo at thoughtLEADERS, LLC
Published July 10, 2024, in The thoughtLEADERS Brief on LinkedIn.
Comments
Double-check, triple-check...
Many tranks for this humoristic post.
I did write a book, entilted "La qualité du management" (the Quality of Management, but as I'm French, it's in French). I wrote it, checked every phrase, every word, and sent it to my editor. It was only at the seventh pass between their professional proofreader and me that I found a faulty reference to ISO 90001... I'm afraid some mistakes still remain. Not very appealing for a book on quality...
If you want a nice example, take a look at the picture below :
Posted on a road, it explains the customers how to reach their supermarket (it says : "At the roundabout, turn right"). But we are in France, not in the UK or in Ireland : we drive on the right side of the road. And on runabouts, you must turn right ! Imagine a accident caused by a driver following the instructions : who is guilty ? the driver ? the supermarket ? the company that made the sign ? the police that allowed the sign to remain in the environment ?
It took them more than 3 months to update the signboard ...
Add new comment