No Eye Candy In This S.I. Screen Shot

Perhaps Sports Illustrated's annual antidote for the winter blues, or "The Swimsuit Issue," grabbed the lion's share of the S.I. editorial staff's attention and proofreading became an afterthought during the lead-up to the issue's publication. A reader has submitted yet another blunder made by the sports mag. This one occurred in a headline on its Web site and is by no means traditional eye candy. It's eye candy maybe only for misanthropic Proofreaders and others susceptible to the inexorable allure of Schadenfreude.

About a month ago, reader T.T. Douglas found the faulty headline pictured and highlighted above and e-mailed the Proofreader the following:

In the headline I believe they are trying to say "outrage" as in "fans are outraged," but instead they typed "outrange." Nice!

Nice, yes. Also nice: T.T. went on to say a couple of laudatory things about the Proofreader--always a great idea.

And yes. T.T., S.I. most definitely intended to to use the word "outrage" (rather than the gibberish "outrange") as evidenced by the correction it made shortly after you noticed the bungled headline. Hopefully this mistake and another recent blunder made by S.I. aren't examples of a new sensibility the magazine is toying with. Stick to the mainstream eye candy you've gotten to know so well over the last 46 years, S.I.: under-clothed skinny babes.

The Proofreader thanks T.T. Douglas for submitting the mistake.

S.I. Makes Error In Baseball Story

Almost a month ago, reader Slapinions e-mailed the Proofreader and stated, ""I found an error in the following S.I. article" about Nick Johnson returning to the New York Yankees. "I thought maybe you'd enjoy it," Slapinions concluded.

Well, Slapinions, the Proofreader never enjoys seeing foolish mistakes like this one, especially when it was made by a publication to which the Proofreader had a subscription for the majority of his youth. But, he most certainly enjoys--with a borderline unhealthy enthusiasm--highlighting, assailing and immortalizing those miscues. So without further ado...

As you can see in the above screen shot, the venerable Sports Illustrated allowed some sloppy copy into an article published on its Web site on December 18, 2009. The bungled phrasing appears to be the result of one or more re-writes made to the sentence. Evidently, writers and editors couldn't decide whether Johnson would replace Matsui, or magically become him. Based on a comparison of Johnson's and Matsui's career stats, Johnson will probably do neither and S.I. writers and editors worth their salt should know that instinctively.

Interestingly, almost a month after the publication of the mistake--an abundance of time to proofread an article--the error still exists on SI.com.

The Proofreader thanks Slapinions for submitting the mistake.