Last updated on 2013.01.06
...and I'm just talking English, not policy!
Taking their cues from their boss, Kristi Noem's proofreaders also aren't showing up for work.
The South Dakota Republican Party has paid for Kristi Noem to send me three glossy campaign flyers so far. Each one of those flyers has contained a glaring textual error that makes me wonder if anyone with a college education reviews these ads before hitting "Print 100,000!"
Sample #1 stuck out immediately to an eager commenter last week:
"Cut and dry" is what the barber does to your hair. "Cut-and-dried" is an adjectival phrase you would use to compare a plan to making herbs or perhaps beef jerky. It means average, routine, unremarkable... or, more damningly, "prearranged or inflexible, completely decided in advance, so it lacks freshness, originality or spontaneity," rather like talking points handed to an unprepared and inexperienced rookie by party bosses. And if you still want to use the phrase to describe your plan, you still need hyphens.
Sample #2 shows a failure of parallelism by sloppy text formatting:
Step back a moment. See that bold orange heading, "Fighting to Prevent"? See the three lines in smaller black font below it? The conclusion to which that layout leads the casual reader is that we're reading three things Kristi is fighting to prevent:
- Kristi Noem is fighting to prevent enactment of a cap and trade national energy tax. (Her opponent, Matt Varilek, is not advocating any such policy, but the attack is at least consistent with GOP paranoia and disregard for truth.)
- Kristi Noem is fighting to prevent cutting federal government spending two years in a row (uh oh...).
- Kristi Noem is fighting to prevent supporting South Dakota farmers and ranchers (rewrite!).
The three lines together might have sounded good in the interns' bull session—fighting! cutting! supporting! Yaaarrr! But when they put those lines on the screen, someone forgot that to carry their punch, those three parallel participles needed to be visually parallel, in size, weight, and placement. A brief fit of careless layout makes the reader think the parallel terms are enactment, cutting, and supporting. Those three words misalign grammatically (noun, participle, participle) and graphically (staggered by centering, they would hang together better left-justified).
Sample #3 hit my mailbox yesterday afternoon. It shows that Noem's people aren't learning from their mistakes. They are getting worse, whiffing three strikes on one page. First, to compensate for the lack of hyphens in Sample #1, they commit outright hyphen abuse:
See that hyphen? It shouldn't be a hyphen (-). It should be an em dash (—). Ask the Chicago Manual of Style.
Sample #3 then delivers a combination of awkward and awful:
First the minor awkwardness at the bottom: "Vote No on Matt Varilek"? Don't we vote on ballot issues, but for or against candidates? And regardless of preposition preference, shouldn't Kristi's flyer positively shout, "Vote for Kristi Noem"?
But the line that draws every English teacher's flag is above that: "Put the breaks on big government spending." Brakes, Kristi, not breaks. What, did you type this ad on your cell phone?
I know, Kristi's not designing these flyers herself. She's too busy handing out coins. But if Kristi Noem cares this little about proofreading—or hiring someone to proofread—documents she's sending out to thousands of her employers, perhaps we should ask her how much attention she's paying to the legislation she drafts and votes on.
What an embarrassment!
SDSU must be so proud.
From a former English teacher: Thank you!
Justin, this SDSU alum shares your sentiment.
This even looks bad to me and I can barely speak the language much less write it - Wow.
Is there more to the photo on the back Cory? Kristi looks like she is looking down at her cell phone. jabber jabber jabber
Who put out sample #3, Cory? It seems like maybe the awkward "Vote NO on" language matches the things that PACs or the like would do pre-Citizens United (and still do, based on some state statutes) to avoid the "magic words" (like "elect", "vote for", etc.) that draw the line between a "candidate ad" and an "issue ad" and, thus, between previously disallowed and allowed communication. If sample #3 is sponsored by someone other than Noem's own campaign, it could be that they're operating in a pre-Citizens United frame of mind and are used to employing tricky wording to avoid being a candidate ad -- or it could be that there remains some sort of "magic words" provision somewhere in the system that makes it best for them to hedge their bets. If Noem's own campaign's putting the ad out, however, they would have no need to avoid simply saying "Vote for our gal" and, thus, probably just made a teeth-grindingly awkward choice with the English language.
Barry: Ha! Nope, no phone, just hands in pockets. The down-turned face seems inexplicable: shouldn't she be looking at the men talking to her, signaling active listening? Maybe it's a signal to her fundagelical friends that she's still acknowledging male headship?
Yo, T! The third flyer comes from the same source as the first two: "Paid for by the South Dakota Republican Party. They can straight-up advocate, can't they?
I never see any mailings from either parties and I am a register that votes in every election. You would think I would be a a target from both sides but nothing. Not complaining just wondering
Oldguy, sometimes parties target their lit to your voting history. A newly registered voter, someone who votes only occasionally, or an independent will get more of these mailings than someone registered as a member of a party who never misses an election and has lived at the same address for years. Right or wrong it is assumed that the first group is persuadable and the second isn't.
idependent
In that case I would say the candidates should be loading your mailbox down with these postcards. I'm at a loss to explain it.
Yeah, the SDRP should be able to do any sort of advocacy they want for candidates ... although the photo captures you include in this post are ALL interestingly devoid of anything instructing the reader to "vote for" Kristi Noem. Sample #1 doesn't even say her name (though I imagine maybe that's only a portion of the flyer?). Simple answer is probably just that the copywriters for the ads are choosing unnecessarily passive language, particularly if they're mailing to undecideds who they don't want to simply annoy into voting for someone else. If someone feels like spinning out conspiracy theories on a Friday morning, maybe the SDRP has gotten so many donations with the caveat that they be spent on something other than the flailing campaign of a candidate that makes SD Republicans look bad that the SDRP is trying to wiggle around into creating ads they can classify as "issue ads" NOT for federal election law but for their budget reports to members. ;)
Nick I was a registered repulican but changed a year ago as was just fed up with both parties refusing to work with each other or even to consider the other side opnion. The two party system works great when parties relaize that at the end we are one. One party control is super bad in Pierre or DC.
Man I wish she'd lose. Varilek better step up his game!
And the photo? What is she looking at?
She is praying Monty. "Gimme me this day my daily bred."
Sorry Kristi, it's all in humor!
I think we need to lighten up on Kristi. She's just living proof that what Rick Santorum said was true:
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." ;^)
She probably waits on tender hooks for you next posts, Cory.
Yah, I know. It it actually tenter hooks, but just heard some talking head use it wrong. Seemed to fit here. Wonder if Kristi says, "chomping on the bit".
All this being said, Kristi is not stupid and I would also say she is far more elite than I will ever be.
Kristi is like the rock star with overnight success. She didn't take the long road getting there to understand all the dynamics and details that go with the job.
She is in over her head as possibly a gifted child would be if moved into college class at age 13.
I know Kristi has friends that may take offense with my comments. All I can say is, friends don't let friends drive drunk. Help her do her job and vote like a true South Dakotan.
Again, all this being said, Matt doesn't have a prayer.
She should look at this;
"The The Impotence of Proofreading," by TAYLOR MALI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OonDPGwAyfQ&feature=player_embedded
Toby, the flyers have her picture and name as well, although Matt gets more real estate on the flyers than she does. One foldout is filled with Matt and his name, and even though it's in paler colors than the warm airbrushed glow given to Kristi, from a distance or a casual glance, the photo doesn't look terribly negative. You see Matt with a microphone making a speech, with the prairie behind him, his name in a prominent font, and the "Matt sucks" text in much less prominent text that might go unnoticed at a glance.
Doug: clever!
That em dash gaffe is almost enough for me not to vote for young Ms. Noem.
I've seen better slogans in grade school class presidents campaigns.
I'm not one to get too fussy on grammar because I'm terrible at it, but when you say Vote no on Matt Varilek like he is a bill, or an object, not a person it gets ridiculous.
Maybe she should actually attend class with those 6th graders that she had lunch with the other day.
Yikes!