Tag: mistake

  • I want candy… wait, what?

    On a recent peruse through the supermarket aisles, searching to satisfy my notorious sweet tooth, I came across a small spelling discrepancy. Allow me to illustrate…

    Exhibit A – Foodland, Brighton, SA

    Exhibit E – Woolworths, Coburg, Vic.

    I am confused. To be honest, I wasn’t completely sure which version was correct.

    But to my surprise, believe it or not, according to dictionary.com, BOTH spellings are acceptable:

    “Confectionery”
    noun, plural -er·ies
    1. confections or sweetmeats collectively.
    2. the work or business of a confectioner.
    3. a confectioner’s shop.

    “Confectionary”
    noun, plural -ar·ies
    1. a candy; sweetmeat.
    2. a place where confections are kept or made.
    3. confectionery.
    adjective
    4. pertaining to or of the nature of confections or their production.

    Go figure.

    Kind regards,
    David M. Green
    For the record, I purchased Fruchocs at Foodland and a MilkyBar at Woolworths. HmmmMMMMmmmm… Ohhhh yeeeessss…

  • You thought Tiger Airways was incompetent…

    On one of my frequent trips to Coburg’s  fabulous Sydney Road (on a quest for some new tea towels) I dropped by one of those dirt cheap discount shops – you know, the ones over-stocked with Southeast Asian merchandise – when I came across this gem:

    Oooh… The “Aerobus”!

    But wait… That’s clearly an Airbus A380 inside. Even if you chalk the missing under-wing engine to creative license (The A380 has two engines on each wing), it’s clearly presented in A380 livery.

    But hang on… I’m confused?

    Why is it labeled as “Aerobus” if it’s an Airbus?

    And take a closer look at that silhouette. That doesn’t look like an Airbus. Maybe it’s one of these “Aerobuses” I’ve heard so much about?

    Or maybe it’s a silhouette of THIS plane, which is on the opposite corner of the box:

    Ah yes, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Of course. And this is related to the “Aerobus” how? Well, it’s a plane, I guess.

    Sure, it’s a different model of plane, and sure, it’s produced by a different manufacturer. But all planes are the same, right?

    According to “Aerobus”, these are some fine qualities you should look for in an aircraft:

    Frequent Flyer
    If they’re referring to the aircraft, I suppose this is a good thing. Yes, the “Aerobus” does frequently fly.

    Real Comfort
    Fantastic! I’m so over other airlines “unreal” comfort with their virtual seats and imaginary in-flight entertainment systems.

    Chief Efficient
    Well that’s lovely.

    Science Refreshed
    Why, who on Earth would want science that’s gone way past its use-by date? I’m sure the “Aerobus” corporation wouldn’t accept any aerospace engineering that had been out of the fridge for more than a couple of days.

    They’re really selling their plane on comfort:

    Am I to understand one can actually walk around, take a seat, relax, feel the “speace” AND enjoy the comfort?

    What is this, a PLANE FOR ANTS!?!

    It’s a toy! You can’t take a seat in it! For one, there are no seats in it! IT’S JUST A PLASTIC SHELL!

    The only comfort you’ll get from this model plane is if you’re one of those people who enjoys inserting things into yourself… Would that mean you qualify for the Mile High Club?

    This reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Mr Burns designs the “Spruce Moose”, a plane that can “fly 200 passengers from New York’s Idlewild Airport to the Belgian Congo in 17 minutes!”

    Mr Burns attempts to force Smithers at gunpoint into the plane, which is only a model, probably smaller than the “Aerobus” above.

    So in conclusion, people are idiots.

    Still, could be worse. It could say “Tiger Airways” on the side.

    Kind regards,
    David M. Green
    No complaints about their selection of tea towels though.

  • Personal Editorial: The Adelaide Advertiser is Crap

    Greetings, 

    The Advertiser: The long established appalling tabloid newspaper circulated in and around the Adelaide metropolitan area. Oh, it’s bad. There’s no question. Oh… wait, there is. “Okay David, why is it bad THIS TIME?” Well, I’m glad you asked. Hold onto your knees, as I prepare to answer…

    Pick up The Advertiser on any given day and you’ll find numerous examples of pointless articles about “celebrities” or someone making an issue of nothing, or Amber Petty’s two cents worth. You know, they took the 2-cent coin out of circulation for a reason. If The Advertiser had any sense, which it clearly doesn’t, it would round Amber’s column down to zero. But it doesn’t stop there. The Confidential section, the 2-page spread for entertainment gossip, is usually a collection of tiny paragraphs about the relationships of TV and sporting personalities, something else about Amber Petty and a big article with some no-name model who no one cared about until she landed an overseas contract and is now leaving the country, forever to be referred to as “OUR (insert model’s name here).” And don’t get me started on the opinion section, even though it’s probably an appropriate place to voice it. Where do they find these people? And why don’t they ever print my hilarious opinions? Especially this one… Hehehe…

    But enough with this abuse. It’s starting to feel a bit “negative.” Let me jump to a couple of specific examples to justify my earlier statement that The Advertiser is crap. In today’s edition there was an interview with B-52s frontman Fred Schneider. I love The B-52s and thanks to this article, I’ve learnt they’re coming to Adelaide later in the year! Horay! However, Ha-ha-have a read of this…

    “Fred Schneider, the frontman of U.S. band the B-52s, has a message for those who label them retro. “We’ve never been an oldies band because we don’t age.” Schneider says in his unmistakable voice. That voice has dominated such hits as Rock Lobster, Private Idaho, Love Shack and Roam.” – Cameron Adams, “B-52s Still Explosive,” The Advertiser, June 11 2009.

    WAIT A SECOND… ROAM? Fred Schneider’s “unmistakable” voice “dominated” the B-52’s 1989 hit single “Roam?” Cameron Adams, have you even listened to that song? Fred Schneider ISN’T IN IT AT ALL! Listen to it again and you’ll find the only two “unmistakable” voices are those of Kate Pierson and Cindy Wilson. There’s no Fred Schneider. If he was in it, you’d know. After all, his voice is “unmistakable.” It’s not like Cameron has mistaken him for another male voice. There are no male voices on that track! Just the beautiful harmonics of the band’s two female singers.

    And so, this has lead me to believe that Cameron Adams thought he could get away with pretending he knew a little something about The B-52s, by getting a bit fancy with singers’ names and song titles. I should know, as I use the same technique to pretend I know stuff too. What he’s obviously done is looked up “The B-52s” on Wikipedia, had a quick look at their discography and jotted down a few of the big singles (Rock Lobster, Love Shack, Roam) and chucked in a lesser known one too just for the hell of it (Private Idaho), you know, make it seem like he knows what he’s talking about. But stupidly, he forgot that Fred Schneider’s unique style of spoken lyrics did not appear on one of those particular tracks (Roam). His mistake is comparable to saying: “I love the way John Lennon sings on Yesterday.”

    Now, I’m sure in all fairness, it was probably just a simple mistake. Will there be a correction in the next edition? I doubt it… Mistakes like this reinforce my strong opinion that The Advertiser is written by idiots, for idiots. It treats the readers like idiots, and in effect helps to turn them into idiots. Here’s one more for you… It’s a bit of an old one but it stuck in my mind and it seems relevant to bring it up here. How appalling is this:

    “(Rove) McManus, who was named on a shortlist to replace US talk host Conan O’Brien on The Late Show, lost the high-profile job to Hollywood actor Jimmy Kimmel.”– Peta Hellard, “McManus Rejected for Talkshow Gig,” The Sunday Times (& re-printed in The Advertiser), May 13 2008.

    Uh… What? Dear God where do I start… Well, first, Conan O’Brien was the host of “LATE NIGHT” not “The Late Show.” Mr Hellard had clearly confused Conan O’Brien with David Letterman, host of “The Late Show.” And it’s not like there was a recent change to the show titles. It had been like that since 1993! Secondly, Conan O’Brien wasn’t replaced with Jimmy Kimmel. He was replaced with Jimmy FALLON! Jesus… and was there a correction the next day? To be honest, I don’t really remember… but I don’t think so. I managed to find that article online. You can read it here. What’s even more unbelievable is the reporter, Peta Hellard, is The Sunday Times’ “Man in Los Angeles.” This guy LIVES in LA. I’m from Adelaide and we don’t even get Late Night with Conan O’Brien on free-to-air TV here and I knew more than he did. I could be their “Man in LA.” Apparently all I need to do is write fiction and throw in a few names. If it makes sense, great. If it’s true, well that’s irrelevant. Oh yeah, one final point: ROVE as host of Late Night? Come on… Although to be honest, he could probably do a better job than Jimmy Fallon… Who’s with me?

    So in conclusion, the world is full of idiots. And many of them read The Advertiser. Some of them write for The Advertiser. And I’m talking about “The Advertiser” in the general sense now. Maybe where you’re from “The Advertiser” is some other generic tabloid newspaper? Maybe it’s an ill informed talk radio host? Or, if you’re from Adelaide, your Advertiser happens to be the actual Advertiser. So my advice to you would be, maybe just think about what you hear in the press before taking it at face value. You should probably cross reference it with a couple of websites or something. Hey, feel free to ask me. And beware the idiots. They’re EVERYWHERE!

    Kind regards,
    David M. Green
    I’m living in my own Private Idaho, on the ground like a wild potato