Errors & Omissions: No need to create false tension – but we couldn't resist

 

The word "but" is sometimes used in the first paragraph of a news report to suggest a tension that is not there. We had one on Monday.

"It may be a quintessential English firm – an Old Bond Street address and the Prime Minister's wife as an adviser helps – but the upmarket stationery manufacturer Smythson has decided it is time to expand the empire and break into Hollywood." There is no obvious contradiction between being an English company and wanting to break into Hollywood. Nor is there an obvious need for the words "upmarket", "manufacturer" or "has decided it is time to". We could simply have reminded the reader that Smythson, the stationer, has a political connection, and reported that it is expanding into product placement, in this case in the new Sherlock Holmes film. Saying it plainly is interesting enough.

No ifs or buts: We did it again on Thursday, when we reported that Republicans in Congress refused to continue a payroll tax cut, "but left themselves vulnerable to angry Democrats". As the writer went on to say that "Barack Obama's strategists must be cock-a-hoop", it would have made more sense to have said, "thus leaving themselves vulnerable".

First time for everything: It must be time to retire "maiden" to mean "first", surely. Some in Westminster still refer to an MP's first speech in the House of Commons as his or her maiden. But does that justify a report on the business pages on Tuesday looking forward to Ocado's "maiden pre-tax profit"? No.

Misdirected outrage: We suggested the opposite of what we intended in a news story on Wednesday. We reported plans for a private bus service for ultra-orthodox Jews in Israel, after "public outrage at an incident where a secular Israeli woman refused to take a seat at the back of a public bus travelling to an ultra-Orthodox neighbourhood in Jerusalem at the request of a religious male passenger". As Gordon Whitehead wrote to point out, that makes it seem as if the public were outraged by the woman's refusal. In fact, as became clear at the end of the report, the outrage was occasioned by the man's request. The sentence should have said something like "public support for a woman who refused ...".

Up to date: Our story on Wednesday about the theft of a Barbara Hepworth sculpture tried to explain who she was: "Ms Hepworth, who died in 1975, is widely considered one of the UK's finest contemporary sculptors." A minor point is that our style is to drop the Mr or Ms for dead people, but more striking was the use of the word "contemporary". After all, she died in 1975. Perhaps the problem was that "20th-century" had been used twice already in the article, in which case "modern" would have done.

Guy Keleny is away

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in