MG-Rover.org Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Corrections and clarifications



Corrections and clarifications

Wednesday December 8, 2004
The Guardian

We called MG Rover an "ailing Coventry company" when, in fact, it is based entirely in Longbridge, Birmingham (Decline and fall of a giant, page 20, November 9). In a later report we quoted the deficit in the workers' pension scheme as £73m. This is the 2002 figure. The latest figure, included in the company's 2003 report and accounts, is £67.6m (Pension predictions show Towers could enjoy £245,000 a year, page 22, November 24). The company has also asked us to point out that its proportion of car sales in the UK is 2.99% and not the 1%-2% we quoted; and that it has 6,100 people on its books at the plant, not the 4,500 we claimed (page 27, November 15).


Nice!!

I wonder what page it was on?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,931 Posts
Goes to show they don't know what the hell they're talking about if they can't even get the basic facts right! :guns:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,419 Posts
parsec said:
Goes to show they don't know what the hell they're talking about if they can't even get the basic facts right! :guns:
And still they have to put a further dig in the report. f***ers the lot of them. That;s just being nasty plain and simple.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
The Guaridan "correction" section is the biggest I have ever seen in any newspaper. When my little brother produced a school newspaper at the age of 7 they were more professional!
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
460 Posts
The Corrections and Clarifications column is on the letters page every day.

Unlike most newspapers, The Guardian's policy is to put the record straight and has a column specifically for that.

It also has a Readers' Editor, part of whose job it is to look into disputes with readers. Again, most newspapers do not.

In most professions, if you make a mistake only your boss and your colleagues are likely to know.

But if you're a journalist a mistake is seen by every single person who reads the paper. You leave yourself open in journalism in a way that's probably unique.

I had a brainstorm this week and captioned a picture of Bobby Moore as Bobby Robson. Don't know why. But that mistake was copied 300,000 times this week. Aaaargh!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,419 Posts
Buttyboy said:
Unlike most newspapers, The Guardian's policy is to put the record straight and has a column specifically for that.
It's just a shame that the way they do it actually probably does more harm than good.

ie "ailing coventry company" to "Ailing longbridge company" and the bit about pensions is just plain arsey

So they correct they amount but feel the need to add the JT bit.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,419 Posts
Buttyboy said:
In most professions, if you make a mistake only your boss and your colleagues are likely to know.
And your less likely to cause harm to a reputation too

Buttyboy said:
But if you're a journalist a mistake is seen by every single person who reads the paper. You leave yourself open in journalism in a way that's probably unique.
Par for the course surely, they leave themselves open but also are able to vent whatever drivel they like to all and sundry, something most people in other professions do not (thankfully)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,733 Posts
The corrections and clarifications page in the Guardian is a well known joke - as anyone who has listened to "I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue" will know.

If the Guardian reported the invention of the printing press in the Middle Ages, the headline would have been "Newt Echnology Spills Ind to Mispronts"
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
417 Posts
It should be called the "We're a bunch of stupid t*ats and we don't know what we are talking about." column.

I thought Editors were there to check the veracity of a story.

Someone is not doing their job.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,909 Posts
Interesting........

I await similar comments about the same and other similar stories and information that has been published in the Times, Telegraph, Mail etc. etc.

Unless of course there's a reason not being talked about that would explain why it's OK for those papers to publish co***ers about MGR without toys being thrown out of the pram on here :lol:

I wonder what that might be :lol:

Regards

Mike :)
 

·
Registered
rover_75
Joined
·
417 Posts
MikeM

I've brought Neil Collins in the Telegraph to book twice about MGR to the point where he was clearly exasperated with the fact he picked an argument with someone that knew what they were talking about. If you search for the thread here the e-mails are there for all to see.

At least the Telegraph though sent Tony Dron out to review the ZT260 and he was the only journo/ racing driver to be allowed to gun the car. The result was a fabulous write up.

Party politics have nothing do to with it but the Guardian has repeatedly got its facts wrong, its opinion has been completely wrong but at least they are consistent - consistently wrong.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,909 Posts
Rovertron said:
MikeM

I've brought Neil Collins in the Telegraph to book twice about MGR to the point where he was clearly exasperated with the fact he picked an argument with someone that knew what they were talking about. If you search for the thread here the e-mails are there for all to see.

At least the Telegraph though sent Tony Dron out to review the ZT260 and he was the only journo/ racing driver to be allowed to gun the car. The result was a fabulous write up.

Party politics have nothing do to with it but the Guardian has repeatedly got its facts wrong, its opinion has been completely wrong but at least they are consistent - consistently wrong.

Who mentioned party politics?

It was The Guardian only a few weeks ago that featured the ZT260 in its top 10 of modern sports/fast cars (there is a thread about it on here). And it was The Guardian motoring section that delivered several excellent write ups of the 75 Tourer.

We all have our views, and they will differ, that's what makes life interesting:)

But, as we all seem to be demanding balance and accuracy from the media (I wish:) ), so we should take care to be as accurate and balanced as we can-otherwise other people will feel the need to provide it.

Regards

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Kevin Davis said:
Just goes to show what a lame waste of paper it is. Why do people bother with it?
Kev.
Well one reason would be that The Times is now a complete farce of a newspaper pumping out Newscorp drivel.

The Grdniau website is actually very good reading. And not many mispronts either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
Surely the point of journalism is to get things right, up to date and relevant?

I don't know a lot. I like the pictures in the corner :spanner:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
The reason I complain about The Guardian is that I only read it and The Observer. I can't complain about the others because I don't read them.

I still think The Guardian is wrooooong about MG Rover. It wants to say that the management are fat-cats, that's why they keep kicking the company.

I post their articles here sometimes, in the hope that others will post articles from other sources. Then, if other users of this site so wish, they can contact those publications and challenge their inaccuracies.

P.s MikeM, I used to think Bryan Robson was Bobby Robson's son.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,909 Posts
Yes I know what you mean. The Guardian can be a pain at times and I say so often, and as for subs..................:lol: No offence intended.

All are people doing their best in difficult and pressured circumstances. No point to me in differentiating between papers as the argument won't stand up.


Bryan Robson:) I like that one.

I won't regale you with some of my **** ups from the other side of the fence:lol: If I did my reputation would plummet, and it ain't got that far to go;)

Regardsa

Mike
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top