pesco — 2013-09-24T12:46:32-04:00 — #1
aliktren — 2013-09-24T13:04:43-04:00 — #2
Instant childish reaction to LOL, but that is actually really, really terrible.
micah — 2013-09-24T13:17:55-04:00 — #3
In their defense, it WAS part of the Whoresley show.
gilbertwham — 2013-09-24T13:18:07-04:00 — #4
We need only one piece of legislation to encourage journalistic integrity & proper fact-checking: ALL retractions and apologies are required to be printed on the front page, above the first story.
daneel — 2013-09-24T13:21:38-04:00 — #5
spunkytws — 2013-09-24T14:13:11-04:00 — #6
While they may have good reasons for removing the original article--such as not wanting to risk someone missing the correction--such a removal always strikes me as "We did something stupid, now we're trying to cover it up". It's great that they've taken responsibility and posted a correction, but, in the digital format, it doesn't seem like it would be hard to correct the article itself. And they could add a "We regret the earlier error" at the end.
Call me nitpicky but I remember several years ago when Elsevier was caught deleting articles from some of its electronic archives. They had good reasons--some of the articles were plagiarized, for instance--but these were digital copies of the print publications, and there was no explanation why, when a patron would click on an article title in the table of contents, they'd get "404 not found". It took a court order to stop them. It was a solemn reminder of how tempting it must be for some publishers to rewrite history.
therealme — 2013-09-24T14:13:30-04:00 — #7
Given the UK's libel laws I don't know if the newspaper made an error, or if the person in question really is or was a prostitute at one time, but they paper isn't willing to press the point.
imb — 2013-09-24T14:40:47-04:00 — #8
marilove — 2013-09-24T14:42:33-04:00 — #9
It was better the first time around. NIPPLES.
trisaneldritch — 2013-09-24T15:38:32-04:00 — #10
Oh come on man, in the case of Mr Horsley, it was a pretty forgivable mistake to make:
ashleyyakeley — 2013-09-24T20:29:11-04:00 — #11
Well that was uncomfortably informative.
brainspore — 2013-09-24T21:55:59-04:00 — #12
I was reminded of that uncomfortable conversation from Meet the Parents:
*I* have nipples, Frank. Could you milk me?
terryborder1 — 2013-09-25T07:08:56-04:00 — #13
It seems to me that there was an equal chance of her being called a horse.
mcgreens — 2013-09-25T09:41:12-04:00 — #14
Mark Thomas's People's Manifesto had a suggestion that all corrections and retractions be printed at the same size and in the same position as the original story. I thought it was a brilliant idea then and I still do now.
pesco — 2013-09-29T12:46:37-04:00 — #15
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.