But who wants that? She didn’t get what she paid for, and it’s a sentimental thing- I can understand the half-assed result not being good enough for her.
Fried cookies? Where! YUUUUUUUUUMMMMM!!! 
Another vote for you not being a Bridezilla. I second (third, fourth, whatever) going over her head to her boss and pointing out the fact that she got the info wrong twice. I have a good friend who is a newspaper publisher and she’d tell you she’d want to know if something like that happened.
Yep…but there is a SLIGHT element of bridezilla in “I don’t have my announcement…” which loses the perspective of why you want the announcement. The thing that causes “bridezilla” to emerge is the loss of perspective. This one is really minor.
“I didn’t get what I paid for” is a different, and completely valid rant.
Personally, I think you should have gone Bridezilla, because then you could have stomped the newspaper building into rubble and burned the rubble to dust with your atomic breath.
Yeah but then Mothra would have shown up and you know how that always ends.
I agree with Dangerosa. Being unhappy because you didn’t get what you paid for is entirely justified. Being upset because you have to correct all the details when you talk to people is understandable–though anyone who has had much dealings with journalism(even though printing correct classified ads/ Wedding announcement information isn’t really journalism) will understand. Being mad about the lack of a “keepsake wedding announcement”–when in fact you have two, albeit incorrect ones, and could easily type up an annoucement to put with them which reads “What I Expected to See in Print” is mostly justified, but leaning towards Bridezilla. Sure, it’s irritating, but it is the loss of perspective which makes one Bridezilla, not any individual demand.
I wanna thank you guys for making me laugh (out loud!) about something that has had me uptight and angry for weeks. I knew posting here would help! 
Isn’t Bridezilla’s nemesis Mothra-in-law?
Daniel
No, she’s very sweet. You’re talking about my EX-mothra-in-law
I understand being upset about this.
Over the years, things have a way of getting lost, damaged, or otherwise misplaced. Newspaper clippings fall out of scrapbooks where they’ve been carefully documented; in worse case, the comments can be lost forever. So even if the OP carefully documented the circumstances of the announcement, there’s no guarantee that it would last over the years. I can’t tell you how many times my mother has redone her photo albums and scrapbooks because the old ones fall apart. A lot of our family history is shoeboxes full of clippings and photos, sans any comments that may have once existed.
The existence of a error-prone announcement would bug me on this level - and maybe I’m reading too much into the OP, but I’m guessing the “keepsake” thing is partly because of this.
Fifty years from now when her grandkids are going through a box of old photos and clippings, they could very easily get a wrong impression of where and when the OP was married. If the clipping disappeared forever and someone was interested in geneology, going back to the old newspaper would turn up the same error-prone announcement.
If you decide to make lemonade, you could try to retrieve your original piece of paper, upon which you first wrote the correct information, and then made the lady circle the mistakes in red. Keep it with the two clippings.
Buuuuuut…
I understand that the mistaken clippings are not appropriate for your real scrapbook. I understand that you wanted this one little thing, for your wedding. I don’t think it’s Bridezilla at all. And if I were you, I would (still, now) have it printed in another newspaper.
If you were Bridezilla, then good for you. One, if somebody fouls up something you pay for, then you should be a little upset. If they do it twice in a row, without being free, you should be TRIPLE upset. If it is done on a wedding announcement, the sky’s the limit. Everybody and their dog know that this is a special thing, and brides are entitled to a certain amount of madness. It is reprehensible that the paper has such goofs in place.
I think, also, that any historian that runs across said announcement, in the event you need to be researched in years to come, will also be put in a bad light. The paper can now be suspect as a primary source.
You done good.
hh
You took the lazy and impersonal route and unfortunately paid the consequences. Obviously the paper was utterly wrong and incompetent, but when you leave your job to someone else, those are the chances you take. If you were that close to this “dear friend,” why didn’t you write her a personal note or call her to share your news? Instead you let her find out about it from reading an online newspaper announcement? You may not have been a Bridezilla, but Miss Manners would hardly approve anyway.
Mazel Tov on your happy event, nonetheless. I sincerely hope you have a lifetime of happiness together. Marriage is a wonderful thing.
:dubious:
My job was to give the facts to the newspaper. It’s the newspaper’s job to print them as I paid for them to be printed.
As for lazy and impersonal, it’s not as if we were never going to speak to our friends and acquaintances about our wedding. We did the sneaky elopement thing, and it just so happens most people read about it in the paper before we had a chance to get in touch with everyone.
I noticed you left out the part where I acknowledged that “[o]bviously the paper was utterly wrong and incompetent.” Demanding your money back was perfectly justified, as they didn’t provide the promised service.
That doesn’t diminish the fact that if it was that important to you, and your friends were that dear to you, you should have taken the time and made the effort to let them know about your nuptials personally instead of relying on a notoriously unreliable third party to do it for you. It was lazy in that you absolved yourself of the need to sit down and hand-write multiple personal notes to loved ones, and impersonal in that you gave the job to a public news source to deliver your personal news to supposedly very dear friends. I wouldn’t consider myself all that dear to you if you had left me to find out about your marriage in a newspaper. Obviously mileage varies, but you asked for opinions and I’ve shared mine; no, you weren’t Bridezilla, but you didn’t display much in the way of proper etiquette, either.
I respect your opinion, and I’m not offended 
The majority of my friends are now spread out across the country and we have minimal contact these days. Doesn’t make them any less "dear’ to me. She wasn’t a bit mad about how she found out, only that she was first under the impression that I had been very close to her town and not let her know. But we cleared that up.
As far as the second announcement goes: If you got married in Indiana and the wedding was in Nashville, Indiana, the paper wasn’t necessarily wrong for just printing “Nashville.” Many papers don’t list the state if the event occurred in-state. Just FYI. They still screwed up the date, and should have refunded your money as requested.
To say nothing of singeing your veil.
You were about 1% as upset as I would be if something like that happened. I’m really more of a rage queen than a drama queen though.