It doesn't mean that. I don't know why you want it to mean that, but even proofreaders can miss things. You're rejecting the credibility of the articles based

It doesn't mean that. I don't know why you want it to mean that, but even proofreaders can miss things. You're rejecting the credibility of the articles based on something unrelated to the actual information the article is talking about. Spelling has nothing to do with the underlying information. Obviously you're going to justify this however you want in your head, and there are others out there who agree with you, but I think most people, when hearing that you literally couldn't read an article because of a spelling error will just roll their eyes.