But it should of!...
Seriously, though, I can accept people changing the language to suit the way they speak as in these two examples. Towing and peaking seem to be more about misunderstanding the original idioms and changing their meaning to me.
It's only a minor thing but I think it's unfortunate when the original meaning kinda gets lost in the shuffle. I think people have forgotten that although Jack of all trades is master of none, I believe the original version went on to say that he's "oftentimes better than master of one" and that some knowledge in a variety of areas put someone at an advantage over a specialist in certain situations.
Another phrase which I understand to have been historically mangled is "feed a cold, starve a fever" which I heard originally didn't mean "you should starve people who are feverish" which sounds like terrible medical advice. The original sense was "If you feed someone who has a cold, they'll be better equipped to fight off that cold getting worse and becoming a serious illness". It's the fever which is "starved", not the person.
I could be wrong though and maybe some lexicologist will tell me how I've completely misunderstood the phrases.
Language is a tool for communication and no one individual can hold back the way it evolves over time. That said, apostrophes are important to me because on paper they differentiate between various meanings of similarly pronounced words which can't be easily read through context alone. Ditching them would be a mistake, in my eyes.
To me the most correct form of language is the one which allows your ideas to be understood by most people without the need for further clarification, hence my sig. I don't always succeed in achieving this but it's what I try to aim for when writing.
