Originally Posted by Claunchy
Either way, I'm likely guilty of misuse myself, because it has become like "begging the question" -- the misuse is now the mainstream use.
I'm not 100% positive since I don't have a reference right here, but I believe that if you're using it to replace "because of," that that is incorrect.
"We were late to the game due to an accident on the highway" is wrong, AFAIK.
Something like "Our victory was due to our teamwork" is correct. ("Due to" as "could be attributed to.")
I only nit on this front because it was drilled into my head for some ungodly reason during SAT tutoring.
In like my first writing class in college, I openly corrected some dude at a peer review session, and everyone looked at me like I was the worst human being alive.