I think that it is just a dropping of reporting standards across the board these days. I am not sure I would limit it to The Times. Back in the day when a newpapaer was actually edited, proofread and then set, these things still used to happen (but I suspect a lot less frequently due to better educated editors) .MechAg94 wrote:Is that really true? They have a lot of people who spend time blogging on their errors and mistakes. You didn't used to have people doing that. IMO, none of the old news sources were ever noble or honorable. They were all out to make headlines and money. Maybe a some individuals were.Kevinf2349 wrote:The Times is usually a very factual and accurate newspaper, it used to be the newpaper of choice for the land gentry.....it is probably a government mouthpiece now though.
Heck the The Guardian even spelt their masthead wrong for one edition!
My local newpaper back in Blighty had a creative editor who worked the front page 'thumbnail headlines'. Each headline thumbnail always started with a bold and enlarged front letter. This chap set the headlines in such a way that first letters spelled out a very terse but rude message!
That was in the afternoon edition, by the evening edition the 'mistake' had been noticed and their was one less employee at the newpaper!. My dad still has an afternoon edition saved I believe. 