Is There Anything Wrong With The Grammar Written In This Online News Article

How do I write good articles about a subject that I don't know anything about?

I have advice for you. I don't know for what reason you're starting a website, which will contain copypasted content, but I strongly advise you not to do this.Because if all your research is only about finding a couple of articles on the topic and making from them one syndicated article, it is still copypasting. And what is the matter? Google doesn't take copypasted content seriously, so your newborn website is likely to be on the bottom of search results (or even thrown out of the search results after complains of the authors of the original content - yes, U.S. copyright law still works).What could you do?1. Do your homework, try to make your research as detailed as possible. Check facts, that you're finding on the web. Don't believe in everything that is posted online.2. Find a couple of reputable bloggers or writers, who are experts in your niche. Read, what they are writing about your topics. Use their expert opinion in your articles, but add links to their blogs and, of course, mention their names.3. Try to understand what you're writing about. Even if your topic is about Husserl's conception of phenomenology or differences in use of Bootstrap and Angular. Indeed, that will help you if you're going to keep writing for that website of yours.4. If you have used content from other blogs or made rewrite, use free duplicate content checker to find out, how successful your rewrite was and were cited your sources or not.

How do you feel about someone making grammatical errors in their written content?

I try very hard to be spelling and grammar correct, mainly due to the fact that I write and publish, and I do what I can to pay attention to those things, but I make sure I have good spelling and grammar software that can help me along.Word has a great checker but recently I also installed Grammarly, which is both a piece of software and an App. I installed the App on Google which automatically attached itself to practically every word processor on my laptop. The App not only flags my errors but every week gives me a run-down of my most commonly made spelling and grammar errors.Today there is little reason for anyone to make spelling and grammar errors. I still see them, all the time, in questions asked on Quora and on postings in Social Media. I can point out issues with your question but now that you have been told about it you will, undoubtedly, check it out?As for the writing on paper—that has become a quick and usually personal apparatus for keeping notes and it is excusable in making mistakes except when you will later maybe need to decipher what it is you were trying to note for yourself.I am not a grammar Nazi but it is nice to see people use the “to, too and two,” as-well-as the “there, their and they’re,” and the “Your and You’re.” or “through and threw,” properly.It is much nicer to do what we can to come across as smart rather than be lazy and slide on the basics of language use. This is what it actually boils-down-to, Laziness—with the second of rushing through with something before posting.How many mistakes did you find in my answer?

Why are so many online articles laced with typos and poor grammar?

In the old days, most publications had a structured copy checking system. A reporter would produce copy, then send it to the desk editor. The desk editor would review the copy, then send it to the copy desk. The copy desk would review the copy, then send it to the head editor.Or some variation of that system.However, the point was that copy had been reviewed by at least four sets of eyes prior to publication.In the face of budget crunches, many newspapers have chosen to scale back their copy desk and eliminate editorial staff. This results in a system where reporters are increasingly responsible for proofing their own copy.As any writer can tell you, that is a difficult proposition and is likely to increase the number of mistakes in copy.On top of that, the internet has forced many outlets to work outside of their core area of expertise.Broadcast outlets have traditionally been less interested in clean copy, as prior to the internet, it was unlikely anyone but the newsreader and correspondents would ever see the scripts.Now, such outlets are expected to produce regular broadcast content, as well as clean web copy. However, they are expected to do this additional job with the same resources and structure once devoted exclusively to producing television or radio content.Where a paper might have three or more editors devoted to clean copy, a broadcast outlet may have a single producer and no copy desk. To make matters worse, that producer maybe responsible for several reporters.Again, this pushes the burden of clean copy back to the reporter.

Is it acceptable and ethical to edit written interview quotes?

"Editorialising" in journalism typically refers to writing specifically to express opinion or injecting opinion into a piece of reporting, which is different from "editing", which, I believe, is what you're referring to.Cleaning up quotes is a fairly standard practice, but different publications impose different rules on how much you can alter a quote. AP does not allow reporters to clean up quotes except to remove extraneous sounds/fillers, like "um" or "uh".I.e. If your interviewee used an inappropriate word, you're not allowed to change it to the word you think they intended to say, even if it's very obvious what they really meant. You are allowed to use square brackets to reword a quote to make it more clear in context (especially in partial quotes) or change case when integrating a quote into your story, but it shouldn't change the semantics of the sentence.Written interviews can be especially problematic for the specific reasons you noted. Journalists follow different conventions from most other writers in terms of paragraph structure, preferring short paragraphs due to readability. Whether or not it's okay to make such changes to a written interview would depend on your editor's policy. I'm personally fine with it as long as you're not weaving sentences together out of order.Spelling mistakes and grammatical errors can also make the interviewee look really bad if you correct them (using square braces) or point them out ("[sic]"), but they make you look bad if you don't take any action. What you can do is call them up and ask for clarification in an effort to get a better quote out of them. Beyond that, you'll probably have to paraphrase and/or truncate the quote as needed.If it'd been a verbal interview, you could have asked them to repeat their last statement one more time, and most people usually do better expressing themselves the second time around. Alternatively, you can email them a cleaned up version of their quote to verify that it's accurate, and they'll usually sign off on the cleaned up version.For further reading, here's a good post from CBS discussing the issue of quote tampering and different attitudes held within the industry:http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-...

What free online tool can I use to rephrase my sentences and check my grammar, other than Ginger?

Hi!Let SpinnerChief help you!Spinner|Chief can not only generate hundreds of new articles in minutes for you, but also in one click it can rewrite articles to a very high level of human readability and uniqueness because it uses The Best Natural Language Analysis and Artificial Intelligence techniques to understand your articles in the same way as Google does..1.SpinnerChief 5 can spin the sentence, paragraph and generate nested spun article fully automatically.By using the latest Natural Language Analysis and Artificial Intelligence techniques, SpinnerChief 5 can understand articles and rewrite paragraphs and sentences automatically, and afterwards it can spin agin in word mode to generate nested spun articles if you need them.SpinnerChief 5 also added the new paragraph and sentence swap spin function, that makes your articles to be more unique. The better news is that now you can create and edit yourself paragraph/sentence spinning rule in SpinnerChief 5 that helps you to spin paragraph/sentence much more readable and unique.2.Our thesaurus is based on Cloud technology, it is created by all SpinnerChief users and it is getting better and better every day.Over 200,000 users contribute their new synonyms to our cloud thesaurus every day; our server collects and finds the best synonyms, then adds them into the Cloud, ready for other users to access.3.Our cloud thesaurus supports more than 20 languages!Basically all main languages have been added to the cloud thesaurus now including German, French, Spanish, Italian, Swedish and Portuguese (both Brazil and Portugal), Dutch, Indonesian, Greek, etc.By using the latest cutting edge Statistical Replacement Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Part-Of-Speech analysis and Emulated Natural Language methods, SpinnerChief 5 can automatically create content that is close to human quality.SpinnerChief 5 has super-advanced functions such as auto-grammar fix, for example it will correct "a apple" to "an apple," plus it can spin "I want to eat the apple, orange and banana" to "I want to eat the banana, orange and apple." We can't list all functions here, there are too many to list! - But one thing is sure, SpinnerChief 5 will give you the best rewritten article - no other spinner can do what SpinnerChief 5 does!

Grammatically, which sentence is correct, "I didn't know" or "I didn't knew"?

English is a strange language, as I think you will agree. Logically, the second part should be in the same tense as the first part, because not knowing was in the past.But no, just to be awkward, it doesn’t follow logic.I think a book could be written solely about the exceptions to a logical rule in the English language. By now, having had several answers (which I haven’t read) you will know the answer to your question. But I will give you a little bit more, just in case I can fill a gap that you are struggling with.Of course the best way to learn grammatical English is to spend a lot of time with educated English people who speak grammatically. These days they are comparatively few and far between. (Just concentrate on solely the word ‘few’ - the rest of the sentence is not necessary, but it is a favourite amongst people born in this country).We describe a single sheep as a sheep. We also describe a flock of sheep as ‘sheep’. Notice that there is no S added on the end, as is usual with plural nouns.If a shepherd was leading a flock of sheep in the past, we say the shepherd ‘led’ his flock of sheep. In the present tense, it would be the shepherd ‘leads’ his flock of sheep. This verb is pronounced like leeds with a long E, and the A, for some strange reason, modifies it to sound like leed. Yep, (I really mean yes) believe it or not, that is English grammar!There are many other incomprehensible things in the English language that can best be solved by 1) reading good books or magazines in English - steer clear of newspapers - or 2) speaking only to those who speak grammatically.N.B. Don’t ever go to Scotland, Ireland or anywhere North of Birmingham. It is best not to go to West of Wiltshire either. You will pick up the incomprehensible accents and some words that are used only locally which English people in the South are not familiar with. (BTW strictly speaking one should not end a sentence with a PREPOSITION, ‘with’ but that strict rule is being done away with. If I said that sentence without a preposition on the end, it would have to be this: “…’with’ which English people in the South are not familiar.” Obeying this rule doesn’t convey the meaning as well as breaking the rule does.I hope this has been helpful. :-)