supposedly supposably is incorrect.

I spent the majority of my spring break in Orlando, Florida (the weather was really nice, thanks for asking! =) ), including a total of two very long days of driving with my friends.

Before we left, I prepared myself and assumed that a 17+ hour drive from Illinois to Florida would include a lot of uncomfortable sleep, countless bathroom breaks and an SUV floor scattered with snack crumbs and empty water bottles – which it did.

With nothing else to do on the long drive, my friends and I brought up very random topics to talk about, including one that – surprisingly – revolved around the misuse of certain words, which explains why I’m even talking about my spring break in the first place.

About halfway into the drive (which is about 10 hours), one of my friends asked if it was going to rain at all during the time we’d be in Florida. My other friend answered with “supposably”. It took me a few seconds to realize what he had said, but I gave him the benefit-of-the-doubt, assumed I had heard wrong and kept my mouth shut.

But, as the drive continued, that same friend kept using “supposably”. I got so irritated that I corrected him as nicely as possible – I hope – which then started a five-minute argument about whether “supposably” was even a word .

We didn’t have access to internet until we got to Florida to check who was right, so the conversation moved to other words people misused on a daily basis (such as who/whom, beside/besides, etc.).

The conversation amused me for several reasons:
Part of me couldn't believe that we were talking about grammar on our trip down to Florida, but a bigger part of me felt that we should have had that conversation sooner.

The English language is a tricky thing, and it's understandable why so many words are misused. I believe ignorance and laziness are both to blame. While some people simply don't know the difference between certain words and when to use them properly in a sentence, I feel that a lot of people are just too lazy to find out the correct uses.

While this may not seem like a problem to many, I worry that a time will come when journalists, copy editors and editors alike will also become too ignorant/lazy to use the proper form of a word in sentences.

If we all make an effort to practice proper grammar now, hopefully that won't happen.

Oh, and for anyone who was wondering, "supposably" is not a word.

Would you print these Photos?

FIRST
If these four pictures of the late Pennsylvania treasurer R. Budd Dwyer ran together in a news story, I think they would gain the most attention. But, a newspaper should never run pictures for the sole purpose of sensationalism, and I think editors need to be sensitive of the situation and of the readers who will eventually pick up the paper and read / see the gruesome details. I would choose picture 2a. (which is the one of Dwyer holding the gun in front of him) because it captures the moment, without going overboard. Picture 1a. is somewhat confusing; if I saw that picture and didn't read the news article that accompanied it, I would think that Dwyer was defending himself. Pictures 3a. and 4a. are too much for a newspaper; readers can get the full effect of the story without having to see a picture of a gun in his mouth or the back of his head being blown up.

SECOND:
The biggest factor that I considered while looking at all of these pictures is the news-worthiness of each one. Are these photos the best ones to use to tell a story, or would other ones suffice that would give readers the same insight into an event? I also used gauged my first-impression on each picture; if I felt uneasy looking at it, I assumed that other readers would feel the same way.

I think picture 1 would be an appropriate photo to run in a newspaper, as long as a relevant story ran with it. This picture is both sad and riveting at the same time; you can feel the boy's grief over his dead dog. At the same time, the picture has taste; the dog is not mangled, the boy is not covered in its blood, etc. I believe this photo would enhance the article that accompanied it.

I was a little hesitant with my decision to run pictures 3 and 5, but my deciding factor was still the news-worthiness of each photo. Picture 3 reflects the aftermath of the gunman's shooting spree; without this photo, I don't think readers would fully understand the tragedy of this situation. The effect is different if someone were to read that a newspaper employee murdered seven, killed 13 and killed himself compared to if they saw a picture of one of the victim's. Granted, if you were able to fully identify who the victim was in the photo, I would not run it in respect to the victim and the victim's family.

I was disgusted with picture 5 – not because of the photo itself, but of the actions and context behind that photo. Because her identity is unknown and her face is obscured, I think this picture should be run in a paper. It spotlights how dangerous celebrations of that sort can be, and will give readers a better idea of what could happen. Instead of just reading about an unidentified woman who had her clothes torn off on Fat Tuesday, seeing this photo gives readers a better understanding of what happened and will hopefully make them think twice about their actions or attending an event like this in the future.

I would not run pictures 2 and 4 simply because I was slightly revolted when I looked at them. I feel that picture 2 is too intrusive; the photographer is capturing a family at a most vulnerable time. The family's wishes must be considered before running this photo; the parents might not want this picture made public, especially since their dead son's body can easily be seen at the bottom of the picture. I think this moment is too private and would cause too much grief for the family if they were to see it in the papers.
Thankfully, the boy was okay, but I was barely able to stomach looking at picture 4. I wouldn't appreciate waking up in the morning and seeing this picture splashed across the front page of my local newspaper, and although it is news-worthy, I believe the news article would be enough to inform readers about the incident. If this picture ran in a paper, I would view it as a result of poor taste and judgment.