Overthought or underedited?

These three recent examples of English gave me pause -- perhaps a longer pause than warranted? You tell me.

"The body of the head of the UN mission has been found." ("All Things Considered," in a report on the Haiti earthquake.)*

"When the principal came on the P.A. to announce that the president had been shot, not one person in that room burst into applause." (Vanity Fair, December 2009, letter to the editor.)**

"Does sleeping well and long enough for you pay off sufficiently to invest in it?" (Anne Naylor's blog on HuffingtonPost, Jan. 13, 2010)***


*"The body of the head" had my head spinning like Linda Blair's till I sorted out the fact that the "body" was literally a corpse while the "head" was a figurative use.

**There's nothing actually taboo about "not one person … burst into applause" -- a single person can burst into tears or laughter, why not applause? But there aren't many Google hits for a person, singular, bursting into applause; usually, we treat a burst of applause as something a group produces. (The fact that this example is negative -- "not one person" -- may have heightened the oddity, if indeed it's the construction that's odd, not me.)

***It's the first sentence of the blog entry, so it must be intentional, but I want to move the "for you" so it reads: "Does sleeping well and long enough pay off sufficiently for you to invest in it?" It's possible, I guess, that she intends "long enough for you" as a unit -- meaning "sleeping as much as you need" -- but in that reading, the "for you" is redundant.