In describing writing errors as “social constructs”, Williams shows how writing errors are very much subject to how they are experienced by the reader.  The fact that some errors are almost universally seen and corrected, while other legitimate errors go virtually unnoticed highlights the point the author was trying to make.  In addition, Williams establishes that people perceive error differently depending on how they look at a particular piece of text.  Even a casual reader may notice a certain set of “significant” mistakes that exist within a text, but a closer more targeted inspection would reveal many more.  If something is either correct or incorrect with no gray area in between, as many writing handbooks might claim, then what accounts for the different way “large” and “small” errors are perceived by the reader?  This is explained by the idea of errors as “social constructs” defined more by how they are experienced than their objective correctness.   

This unique take on errors may also help to explain differences in the way Wikipedia is viewed.  Williams states:

“If we read any text the way we read freshman essays, we will find many of the same kind of errors we routinely expect to find and therefore do find”

Many people choose to read Wikipedia as they might read a freshman essay, so they find many errors.  However, it can be shown that Wikipedia really does not contain a statistically high amount of real errors.  The way the individual views Wikipedia may account for this discrepancy.