RepMan writes about the lastest absurd result of a public figure/head honcho neglecting to run copy past a proofreader or editor before releasing it to the masses.

It seems a company called TextTrust–which hawks “the Internet’s highest quality web site spell checker”–sent out a press release full of–you guessed it–typos. The misspelled words included independent, accommodation, and definitely, which were spelled independant, accomodation, and definately. Ouch.

TexTrust’s PR manager immediately accepted responsibility for the incident, but as RepMan writes, “the damage had [already] been done. TextTrust became something of a water cooler joke.” He goes on to articulate one of my main points as to why copyediting your work is essential to maintaining your company’s reputation: “If he/she can’t get the spelling correct in what was probably a critically important press release, can he/she be trusted with other assignments?”

I’m a writer, an editor, and a voracious reader. The English language has been my passion since before I can remember; moreover, it’s now my bread and butter. I get paid to know the difference between principal and principle, and to know the three distinct meanings (and spellings) of pallet, pallette, and palate.

But lately, as I’ve started teaching my 4-year-old son to read, I’ve begun to feel that the conventions of English spelling represent little more than a cruel guessing game. My child knows that the K sound starts the word kitty. Why shouldn’t it also start the word cake?

The Simplified Spelling Society knows why, and it has a solution: reform English spelling to reflect alphabetic principles of sound, replacing ridiculously spelled words like rough with simplified forms such as ruf.

If everyone could spell, my job would be a lot easier (well, actually, I’d probably be out of a job). But wouldn’t a literacy based on logic be better for everyone?

What do you think?