Two Arrested After School Break-in - WHNT

Dear the writer of this story:

This lead would sound better by saying the student's attendance wasn't required.

The second sentence needs an 'a' to give a number for how many security officers saw the kids.

In the fourth sentence, it's unnecessary to put the police 'were able' to arrest them. Instead, a more concise sentence is: Police arrested them...

I have caught numerous mistakes on several of the online articles published by WHNT. I have sent an email about other errors to WHNT, yet have never received a reply/thank you.

I would think a copy editor would correct these before they go live. Does this news station not have an editor? If not, please respond, as I would be willing to provide these services at a modest compensation.

Sincerely,
An unemployed technical writer/editor

Sincerely,
An unemployed technical writer/editor

Could this be EX-48er from WAFF????

Really, get a life you lunatic! WHNT the article seemed fine to me, no need to respond to this nut.

Concerned Journalist wrote:

Dear the writer of this story:
This lead would sound better by saying the student's attendance wasn't required.
The second sentence needs an 'a' to give a number for how many security officers saw the kids.
In the fourth sentence, it's unnecessary to put the police 'were able' to arrest them. Instead, a more concise sentence is: Police arrested them...
I have caught numerous mistakes on several of the online articles published by WHNT. I have sent an email about other errors to WHNT, yet have never received a reply/thank you.
I would think a copy editor would correct these before they go live. Does this news station not have an editor? If not, please respond, as I would be willing to provide these services at a modest compensation.
Sincerely,
An unemployed technical writer/editor

mike wrote:

Really, get a life you lunatic! WHNT the article seemed fine to me, no need to respond to this nut.
<quoted text>

You should avoid the use of the qualifiers--really, rather, very, little, pretty--these are the leeches that infest the pond of prose, sucking the blood of words.
-E.B. White

Big Rig Driver wrote:

Sincerely,
An unemployed technical writer/editor
Could this be EX-48er from WAFF????

Not hardly. I worked for a different acronym (NASA). I'm a big fan of the news reported on WHNT. I am tired of seeing needless mistakes in its stories, and have felt compelled to point them out in hopes the grammar, capitalization and editing will improve. It was also a thinly veiled attempt to gain employment.

It was also a thinly veiled attempt to gain employment.

McDonalds is hiring.

Big Rig Driver wrote:

It was also a thinly veiled attempt to gain employment.
McDonalds is hiring.

Say whatever makes you feel good. They have fixed the errors. I'm cool.

Its not about me-----its about your future career.

McDonalds is really hiring.

Big Rig Driver wrote:

Its not about me-----its about your future career.
McDonalds is really hiring.

You should take note of my previous reply about the use of that qualifier. For your added edification and amazement, you should avoid the use of the qualifiers--really, rather, very, little, pretty--these are the leeches that infest the pond of prose, sucking the blood of words.

Also you are using the wrong words when you declare that it is not about you. You should have used, "it's not about me." It's obvious you have never heard of an em dash or how to appropriately use one. Just because you find that franchise as an equatable place of employment, doesn't mean someone with a college degree would as well.

My son was arrested for this bogus crime. You should be fighting for his justice instead of taking childish shots at the writer. Help us fight for justice!

My son was arrested for this bogus crime.

The mother never believes her son may be guilty.

hat franchise as an equatable place of employment, doesn't mean someone with a college degree would as well.

Most people who work for McDonalds have college degrees as well as myself.