Thank you MSN.COM! This morning I was struggling to think of something to write for my Friday Quick Shots. I had little to nothing. Then this gem came across my news ticker: an article posted on MSN titled “Meet the Man Who Deactivated Trump’s Twitter Account.” What was entertaining about the article was not the information contained within, but how the article was written. Here are a few choice quotes:

“One such moment took place earlier this month, when the very active, very watched Twitter account of President Donald Trump was for 11 minutes.”

Obviously, some words had been omitted near the end of the sentence. It is supposed to read “was abruptly deactivated for 11 minutes,” however, what was posted makes it sound like Trump’s twitter account only existed for eleven minutes, which, for many people, is still eleven minutes too long.

“U.S. President Donald Trump that you can use Twitter as an effective mouthpiece without all the pain and price of dealing with the media.”

At the time I read this I wasn’t exactly sure what the author’s point was, but it sounded like a scolding. Something like, “Donald Trump, it’s a shame that you can use Twitter this way to avoid facing the media!

“[Trump’s Twitter account is] also one of the most notorious, because of his flippant jokes, insults, rants and .”

C’mon, don’t leave me hanging. “Rants” and what? Maybe the authors were trying to simulate what it was like when Trump’s account suddenly went silent.

“So for those who haven't been happy with Trump -- and judging by the popular vote results from the 2016 election, that accounted for a -- those deactivated 11 minutes became a burst of unexpected joy.”

Judging by the previous paragraphs, that accounted for another opportunity for the authors to leave out some key words.

“Twitter, in its turn for more transparency, that the account's shutdown was accidental.”

??????? And these were just in the first five paragraphs. The article goes on for another twenty to twenty-five, but I stopped there. To MSN’s credit, they have since corrected the errors. However, by the time I read the article it had been posted for twelve hours. I can’t totally fault the authors because from the context of the article I strongly suspect that they might be European and some of the problems may have occurred in the translation from their native language. Or, since all the corrections are also hyperlinks, it's possible that some coding snafu caused the omissions. Still, I would have thought that MSN, a major news provider who has a reputation to uphold, would have had a proofreader or editor on hand to catch these things before they go live? Twelve hours and no one caught this. I do my best to catch any typos or grammatical errors before posting anything on Half Air. I typically read everything I post one or two additional times, and, if it’s a particularly important article, I will have my wife read through it, as well. That way, Half Air’s readers can be assured that everything they see on the site will always, without fail, be free of any errors. No exceptions! (Yes, that is an open invitation for you to post any errors you have found on this site--and there are probably several--in the comments below. Just remember, be considerate. No one enjoys scrolling through pages and pages of comments.)