Unpalatable Art Fare?

ITEM: Wall Street Journal, Friday, March 7 (or thereabouts). "What to wear to an art fair." (Really? People need instruction on this?) In  a sidebar to this urgent sartorial advice, a lady by the name of Christina Binkley suggested wearing a basic black backdrop (so to speak), against which one could use a broad palate. Twice. 

As you know, Livia is not one to judge, but--well, OK, she is one to judge. How did this woman earn the right to have her opinions published in a national and well-respected newspaper when she appears to be inviting people to march around art fairs with their mouths wide open? More to the point, why did the editors of the aforementioned journal not catch and correct this howler? Twice?

Livia despairs. People who write for publication owe it to the rest of us to apprehend that our language is filled with homophones. You in the back, there: stop snickering! Homophones are words that sound alike but are spelled differently and have different meanings, to wit: palate, palette, pallet. 

• Palate = roof of the mouth; alt., discerning taste. 
• Palette = color wheel.
• Pallet = sleeping mat; alt., flat, wheeled tray for moving numerous or bulky items.

And editors owe it to writers to  protect them from looking foolish or moronic in print. Livia is envisioning a number of potential causes for Ms. Binkley's lapse: She may actually think that "palate" is the right word, in which case there is no hope for her. Or she might have intended to use "palette," but is a less-than-accomplished typist. As for the editor, Livia has some words that cannot be quoted in a family newspaper. It is the editor's job to know the difference, to read a writer's work carefully, and to correct mistakes. Shame on the one who left Ms. Binkley open to ridicule.

Breaking News: CNN continues to bring inanimate objects to life

From CNN.com: "New GPS podcast looks at foreign affairs and global policies."

Now, I love Fareed Zakaria as much as the next left leaning news junkie grammar snob--er, I mean Snot. I liked him better in the early days for his gift of explanation to the American public as to why "they" hate us. I guess it was inevitable that the paragon of newsentertainment would get ahold of him.

There is sooooo much to work with on this example. The combination of assumed-to-be widely-understood terms (CNN is trying wayyyy too hard); use of the term "new" applied to a program which is also new. Global policies? I can't. As a bit of introspection has revealed, Cicero can be a bit too literal, and perhaps too Snot-ty. So I'll merely focus on CNN's staggering, stubborn, and stupid ability to attribute human behavior to--not just inanimate, but written and/or recorded--objects. A "podcast looks..."

Personification is cute and charming when used by children who address their stuffed animals. It can be an interesting technique to describe societal shifts or events (e.g. "economic diarrhea"). Message to CNN: your credibility as a serious news outlet **may** be in jeopardy if you can't master basic English. The old Cicero might acuse CNN of contributing to the decline of civilization. Now, that's a little over the top, isn't it? The "new" Cicero will stick to basic judgmental superiority.