partially processed quality signage product

domesticat's picture

See this sign, currently located eastbound on Madison Blvd. Read the sign carefully.

A transcript of a phone call I placed to STG Outdoor (256-536-1568) just now:

me: "Hello. I have questions about your billboard on Madison Blvd… In addition to production work, do you offer any kind of proofreading service?"
Ms. Salesdroid: "I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. What do you mean?"
me: "I'm wondering if you offer any kind of error-checking for your clients' billboards. Spelling, grammar, etc."
Ms. Salesdroid: "Well, we usually look over the design with the client, but no, no error-checking like that."
me: "Is there a separate charge for this look-over?"
Ms. Salesdroid: "No."
me: "All right. That's what I needed to know. Thank you very much."

Wow. I feel so much better now—here I thought businesses were actually being charged for that kind of highly specialized editing. It's good to know that outdoor sign companies aren't overcharging folk here in northwest Alabama for their quality signage product.

It's also good to know that our billboard creators are doing their best to prevent our innocent children from being exposed to bad grammar and spelling. Think of the horror of low SAT scores that would result if they didn't!

(I wonder if this company does copywriting—and, if so, how much they charge?)

canspice's picture

Here's what I would've said had I felt like wasting money on them; "Hi, I'm calling from the Department of Education. We'd like to put up a billboard of what people who don't have any schooling write like. Can we have your advertising people come up with something for us? They seem to be experts in illiteracy. Thanks."
tychoish's picture

That is quite wonderful!
gfmorris's picture

That's one of the most common mistakes, and it irks me every time I see it. :) But I know the folks at STG ... they're generally cluefucked. :)
Sean's picture

Did we just find a new job for you Aims?
Tialessa's picture

LOL! That does seem to be one of the most common mistakes, but it's also one that makes me batty. The only thing that makes me more batty is trying to read netspeak - the version where folks use "u" instead of "you" and "2" interchangeably for "to", "too" or "two". Thanks for the laugh, Amy!
mmarlay's picture

To say nothing of the irritating people who insist on using "it's" as a possessive.
Debi's picture

How funny! I got a kick out of that, as did the rest of my group at work. We are technical writers and we edit everything we read too! :-D

Post new comment

User login

Recent comments

  • Anonymous 2 days 18 hours ago [view]
  • Anonymous 2 days 19 hours ago [view]
  • Anonymous 2 days 20 hours ago [view]
  • Anonymous 2 days 20 hours ago [view]
  • katre 2 days 21 hours ago [view]

Search

Hello, anonymous!

If you're seeing this, you're not logged in. A lot of content here is only visible if you're logged in, and comments by anonymous users are held for moderation. Consider getting an account to save yourself some frustration?

domesticat.net

is the home of Amy Qualls-McClure since 2000. She is a Drupal / quilt geek in Huntsville, Alabama. One spouse, two cats, no kids, lots of opinions.

Public account for work and Drupal stuff: Private account for friends and personal life:

me on plurk me on drupal.org my music habits on last.fm my photos on flickr my bookmarks on del.icio.us my bookmarks on pinboard.in Amy Q. on foursquare what I'm reading

Some content is locked. Copy these links AFTER logging in for a query string giving you full feed-reader access:

Atom feed, entries RSS feed, entries RSS feed, comments