Sometimes words have two meanings

Maybe it's unfair, but when I'm reading what purports to be an in depth analysis of the role of ratings agencies (Moody's et al) in the housing bust I'm disinclined to continue reading when multiple times the author writes that the SEC has 'former' authority over the agencies rather than 'formal'. If you can't be bothered to check your work, why should I be bothered to read it? It indicates a sloppiness of thinking that gives me cause to doubt the quality of work done on the rest of the work most importantly the fact checking.

My level of expectation is commensurate with the site, naturally. I don't expect the average blogger to do painstaking copy editing. But on the site of a major national publication I expect at least a high school level command of the language. CNN is perhaps the worst offender, and I long ago gave up looking at anything more than headlines on that site, but it is astounding how poorly written and edited the content on many 'professional' web sites is.