When 'mediums' becomes the matter

The article reported on a change in staffing at The Times, a fairly serious matter. But some readers saw an equally worthy topic in the choice of a particular word. Gene Aker of Los Angeles, in fact, saw what he considered a misused word as a dire sign of the changing Times.

The line in question: "Two senior Los Angeles Times editors were given new responsibilities Thursday as part of an effort to create a 24-hour newsroom serving multiple mediums."

"Mediums? Individuals through whom others seek to communicate with the dead? Do you even have a copy desk these days?" Aker wrote, wondering if this apparent goof reflected "the downward spiral of the quality of your newspaper."

(Aker wasn't alone in seeing the specter of psychics in that phrase. On Friday Alan Mutter's Reflections of a Newsosaur blog had a post featured an exchange about the word.)

In fact, Times copy editors put some consideration into using "mediums" (the word, not the psychics). Henry Fuhrmann, who oversees style and grammar in the newsroom, explained in a note to Aker.

Word choices from the political season

As the campaign heats up and the number of politics stories increases, so do the complaints and comments about coverage.  A post on this journal in coming days will tally reaction to recent front-page stories on Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama. Meanwhile, word choices from three stories last week each brought multiple comments. In two cases, readers said they saw editorial opinion: in one, a headline that seemed to suggest that the $700-billion financial bailout proposal was in the national interest, and in the other, a story that seemed to bestow on a Democratic candidate an honorific that wasn't given to the GOP candidate.

The third was a matter of subject-verb agreement. In an indication of how grammar can incite in some people the same passion that politics does in others, that one brought nearly 20 complaints.

Manor vs. manner

A story in Business about when sexy becomes too sexy gave rise to an entirely different sort of debate among some readers whose focus is grammar, not underwear: Is it "to the manner born" or "to the manor born"?

The criticisms come in no matter which way The Times spells it (for the record, the phrase "to the manor born" has been used three times in the past three years; the spelling has been "manner" eight times).

The most recent article, which spelled it correctly, was about the CEO of Victoria's Secret revisiting the chain's reputation in light of its disappointing financial performance. A few readers got past the references to sex appeal to question the Shakespearean reference in a comment from Chief Executive Sharen J. Turney. Turney said that the brand's original story line was about a "to-the-manner-born Londoner named Victoria whose lacy underthings, we assume, were her little secret."

No "holiday closings" box, and lessons on "lay" vs. "lie"

What they lacked in size (a small box; a three-letter word) they made up for in meaning. Editors in the California section neglected to tell readers what offices were closed on Monday, the federal holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr.; and a headline used "lay" instead of "lie."

Who?

Or is it "whom"? When editors don't know, readers do. Other gaffes, too, bring notes of frustration from grammarians. This journal will give those readers a chance to try to save the language, and editors a chance to explain how sometimes The Times is actually right. (Or at least the editors are not always wrong: For instance, according to the L.A. Times stylebook, and unlike what some readers believe, splitting infinitives isn't a cause for hanging.)

Following are two answers to often-asked questions that come with the grammar corrections, and responses as well for two recent goofs.

Honors awarded

"Despite intense pain and unchecked loss of blood," his Medal of Honor citation reads, "he pinned down the enemy with accurate rifle fire while a friendly squad captured the enemy gun by skirting the
minefield and rushing in from the flank."

That was part of Monday's obituary for Silvestre Herrera who was, as the story continued, "a Mexican-born World War II Medal of Honor recipient who captured eight German soldiers after single-handedly  assaulting a machine-gun nest and continued fighting after losing both of his feet in a minefield during a second solo assault on another enemy position."

The headline said that he had "won" that medal, though, and several readers spoke up.

Aggravated by acronyms

Sid Turkish of Beverly Hills writes: "For more than 30 years, I have been writing to ask The Times to change its editorial stance on the use of acronyms. Acronyms should either immediately follow, or immediately precede, the word group that it stands for. The Times continues to use acronyms which are often many paragraphs after the [full name] the acronym refers to, requiring the reader to search diligently through all the preceding sentences."