The continued dumbing down in print media

3393RP

3393RP

En-Route
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
4,219
Display Name
Display name:
3393RP
I received the new copy of Flying in today's mail, and the cover story is about Wipline and their floats. It's a good article, except for a glaring error.

The first couple of paragraphs discuss the first use of floats on an airplane, one of those being the float plane flown by "American aviation pioneer Glenn Curtis". Huh. Never heard of him. The author (or editor) compounds this folly by discussing "Curtis' pioneering flight".

The author is described a "an award winning author, business jet pilot, flight instructor, podcast host, and industry blogger". Noticeably absent from that brief CV are his qualifications as an aviation historian and the ability to properly use singular noun possessive rules.
 
I bailed on Flying .. it was sad but no more cool real flying stories, just bloviating articles

The COPA magazine is actually much more "down to Earth" ironically enough

Garrison, Lunken, there are a few that are good.. but by and large the publication has lost its appeal
 
Just to be clear, your complaint is that they left an S out of his name? Or is there something else more subtle I’m missing?

Curtiss’ is the correct possessive form for a proper noun ending in S, at least according to my 5th grade grammar teacher.
 
bflynn said:
Just to be clear, your complaint is that they left an S out of his name? Or is there something else more subtle I’m missing?

Curtiss’ is the correct possessive form for a proper noun ending in S, at least according to my 5th grade grammar teacher.
Click to expand...

I was taught the same, however, like everything, there's an argument about it. :D

https://www.dictionary.com/e/whats-the-rule-for-doing-a-possessive-after-the-word-s/

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/possessive-of-proper-names-ending-in-s/
 
Yeah, Glenn is famous enough that they should spell his name correctly.

I find it amusing when some of the writers step outside of their knowledge base. One of the home-build airplane magazines has a column by a fellow who's a good and respected electrical engineer. He once said silicon is made by heating quartz sand until it melts and letting it cool down. That's the way to make a low-grade glass. He forgot to add carbon so the silicon dioxide gets reduced to silicon.
 
I subscribe to a monthly column by Martha Lunken. Every month it comes in a wrapper that has pictures of planes I'll never be able to afford, plus lots and lots of advertising. As far as I'm concerned they could omit the fancy wrapper and just send me Martha's column.
 
I once received a year's worth of Flying magazine for free. I found it to be worth about what I was paying. Perhaps a little less, since I invested time in reading it. Aviation journalism is dismal at best.
 
We live a soft life where that’s what we complain about. No offense, I live here too and complain about the same stuff that doesn’t really matter. One of my favorite all time threads on POA is the one about pedantry (of which I am an accused, lol). Just remembering how blessed or fortunate many of us are. Carry on...
 
I subscribed to both Flying and Plane and Pilot in February of this year when I started up my flight training. Agreed with most of the others re: Flying - I'm not sure how relatable a relatively detailed article on a high performance engine swap for a King Air is to me - but Ms. Lunken writes a great column.

I literally just received my first issue of Plane and Pilot last week (8 months after subscribing) and that thing is an absolute dud. Glad I wasn't sitting by the mailbox for that one...
 
RussR said:
Lots of people like Martha Lunken's columns. I just don't get it. Every time I read one, I'm left wondering "what was the point of that column?" I find them to be generally rambling and without form or direction.
Click to expand...
Some of us just enjoy the fact that somebody with an attitude like hers actually worked for the FAA.

I just read her columns online, no need to pay for a magazine that's otherwise pretty boring.
 
RussR said:
Lots of people like Martha Lunken's columns. I just don't get it. Every time I read one, I'm left wondering "what was the point of that column?" I find them to be generally rambling and without form or direction.
Click to expand...


They are mostly entertaining real-life stories, and real life is often rambling and without form or direction. I enjoy her wry wit.
 
86Aviator said:
I literally just received my first issue of Plane and Pilot last week (8 months after subscribing) and that thing is an absolute dud. Glad I wasn't sitting by the mailbox for that one...
Click to expand...

Plane&Pilot went digital for this summer. The print version is just now back. It’s the one magazine that represents the type of flying I enjoy. It’s important to support these magazines if you want them to continue.
 
3393RP said:
I received the new copy of Flying in today's mail, and the cover story is about Wipline and their floats. It's a good article, except for a glaring error.

The first couple of paragraphs discuss the first use of floats on an airplane, one of those being the float plane flown by "American aviation pioneer Glenn Curtis". Huh. Never heard of him. The author (or editor) compounds this folly by discussing "Curtis' pioneering flight".

The author is described a "an award winning author, business jet pilot, flight instructor, podcast host, and industry blogger". Noticeably absent from that brief CV are his qualifications as an aviation historian and the ability to properly use singular noun possessive rules.
Click to expand...
1. The author probably DOES know how to spell Curtiss' name correctly and "got bit" by the editing process. That kind of stuff happens to the best.
2. You DID know who he was talking about - so :rolleyes:.
3. I was taught that version of apostrophe usage, and my father is quite the grammar and syntax fanatic, so that one does not stick.
 
I prefer Pipers and Cessna Owner magazines! Not sure why! :D
50264187863_f943816d63_c.jpg
50199910602_f73d1aa42f_c.jpg
 
RyanShort1 said:
1. The author probably DOES know how to spell Curtiss' name correctly and "got bit" by the editing process. That kind of stuff happens to the best.
2. You DID know who he was talking about - so :rolleyes:.
3. I was taught that version of apostrophe usage, and my father is quite the grammar and syntax fanatic, so that one does not stick.
Click to expand...

Note I said it was either the author or editor who made the mistakes. That's immaterial. The "World's most widely read aviation magazine", as they call themselves, shouldn't make bonehead errors like that.

Check any writing style website. The proper usage of singular possessive nouns dictates it as 'Curtiss's.
 
This reminds me of the debate over the word flammable. There was no such word until people screwed it up so often that the lexicographers just gave up and made it one.
 
3393RP said:
Check any writing style website. The proper usage of singular possessive nouns dictates it as 'Curtiss's.
Click to expand...
Just because it’s on a website doesn’t mean it’s right. Check the style manuals listed in the websites @EdFred listed and see if the websites he listed are correct.
 
3393RP said:
Note I said it was either the author or editor who made the mistakes. That's immaterial. The "World's most widely read aviation magazine", as they call themselves, shouldn't make bonehead errors like that.

Check any writing style website. The proper usage of singular possessive nouns dictates it as 'Curtiss's.
Click to expand...

I did. Some disagree with you. I even posted links.
 
Spell check has people stupid. Loosers. And we won't even talk about the fact that data is plural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top