Patrick Nielsen Hayden observes that you can always count on the Manchester Guardian to lower the typographic bar:
Posted by DeLong at August 16, 2004 07:15 PM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this postElectrolite:: Why they call it the Grauniad:
Avedon, via AIM: “It’s hopeless. They can’t even use a spill-chicken.”
i don't get it. can someone explain to me the significance of this post? sorry to make my ignorance so obvious to the world, but i just don't get it.
Posted by: victor on August 16, 2004 07:23 PMIt hasn't been called the Manchester Guardian in 40 years. I know Americans have this urge to put the place British papers are published into their names, but it really is The Times, not the London Times, and The Guardian, certainly not the Manchester Guardian (it's published in London now)
victor: The Guardian is famous for its less-than-stellar typesetting, hence the Private Eye-bestowed "Grauniad" name. In this example, it's "Britian"
Posted by: keith on August 16, 2004 07:30 PMDamn, you beat me, Keith.
Anyway, they've fixed it, now. Probably read this weblog.
Posted by: Avedon on August 16, 2004 07:40 PMAlso the English Beat, the London Suede, the UK Subs. Wait, they were really the UK Subs...
Posted by: ogmb on August 16, 2004 09:13 PMFunnydumb:
http://www.mipmip.dsl.pipex.com/tidbits/grauniad.shtml
Posted by: ogmb on August 16, 2004 09:15 PMIts not been true since they switched to electronic typesetting over ten years ago.
Posted by: Cian on August 17, 2004 03:49 AM"Tidbits"? Some people can't spell titbits, either.
Not like the financial times is any better especially in the US edition.
Posted by: Meissner, C on August 17, 2004 05:57 AMAlthough they're no longer The Grauniad they do have a wonderful Corrections and Clarifications section. For example, today we have:
"In a review of the film, My Architect, a subhead referred to the director, Nathaniel Kahn, as the illegitimate son of Louis Kahn, the subject of the film (Wild thing, Friday Review, page 12, August 13). The note in our style guide says: "Do not use to refer to children outside marriage (unless in the historical context, eg "the illegitimate son of Charles the Good")."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/corrections/story/0,3604,1284405,00.html
These clarifications can in turn prompt further comment from the reader's editor:
"The Ukraine correction brought a protest from a reader, who wrote: "I was rather irritated today to read the 853rd (approximately) grovel in the corrections and clarifications column for having followed perfectly normal English usage in writing 'the Ukraine'. Somebody (or bodies) seems to find this usage of the definite article offensive ... I can only wonder who the fuck is whining ..." "
http://www.guardian.co.uk/readerseditor/story/0,11682,1282945,00.html
Posted by: Martin on August 17, 2004 08:58 AMDon't they have a spelchercker? :-)
Posted by: Jean-Philippe Stijns on August 17, 2004 09:00 AMAccording to its masthead, the Guardian is published in 'London and Manchester', so Manchester Guardian isn't necessarily incorrect if you must do the place-name-in-newspaper-title thing. The Guardian Media Group also owns most of the local newspapers around Manchester, so it retains its ties with the area.
I personally BdL's references to the 'Manchester Guardian' massively endearing and I hope they continue, regardless of its geographical origin.
Posted by: Simon on August 17, 2004 09:20 AMThe killer Grauniad correction is this one:
In our interview with Sir Jack Hayward, the chairman of Wolverhampton Wanderers, page 20, Sport, yesterday [August 11], we mistakenly attributed to him the following comment: "Our team was the worst in the First Division and I'm sure it'll be the worst in the Premier League." Sir Jack had just declined the offer of a hot drink. What he actually said was: "Our tea was the worst in the First Division and I'm sure it'll be the worst in the Premier League." Profuse apologies.
It's not that other journalists don't make frightful mistakes like this, but it's only the Guardian that admits it. For the rest of the world the Corrections & Clarifications column is a little bit of entertainment - for journalists, it's Daily Schadenfreude.
Posted by: ajay on August 17, 2004 09:57 AMThe best Guardian correction - and possibly the finest newspaper correction of all time - is still the deathless:
"The absence of 'Corrections' in The Guardian
yesterday was due to a technical fault and not
to a sudden onset of accuracy."
Brad,
To add to others' comments, and as I have pointed out before, it's not called the Manchester Guardian. It hasn't been since 1959.
Do you still fly to Idlewild?
Matthew
Posted by: Matthew on August 17, 2004 02:29 PMAlso I should add that since about 1988 it's not had a reputation for typos.
Posted by: Matthew on August 17, 2004 02:30 PM>Do you still fly to Idlewild?
Of course not, And you have a problem with Brad, call him at his office: his number is MIssion 3-4027.
Posted by: Calton Bolick on August 18, 2004 07:31 AM