Glaring error in Daily Mail online article

[GreenTeaPingPong]

If you were ever in doubt about the poor standards of journalism at the Mail. They've put up a story about a woman who has been sentenced for causing death by dangerous driving. Their article states several times in different places that the woman was jailed 'for life'.
Surprised at a life sentence for dangerous driving when murderers can get less than that?
You'd be right. She was jailed for 4 years and eight months.
How embarrassing.

mail article
actual story on the CPS website

How did you find the article if you disapprove of MailOnline? Why are you driving traffic to their website?

And everything else that the Mail publishes is true is it?

How embarrassing.

@limitedperiodonly

How did you find the article if you disapprove of MailOnline? Why are you driving traffic to their website?

How did I find the article? By reading a variety of online news Why are you driving traffic to their website? Er, you think I'm somehow being paid to post this or something? Weird.

@vajingleberry

And everything else that the Mail publishes is true is it?

How embarrassing.

I think you'll find that's what's known as a straw man. How have I implied that everything else they write is true? Some of what they write is accurate, some is misleading or biased (like most newspapers who have an editorial position), some is downright wrong. This is an example of a factual inaccuracy. I don't get what your problem is. Except that this is Mumsnet, so I should expect to get jumped on. Weird.

I do wish people on this site would stop bloody policing other users. Who do you think you are unbraiding others for visiting, either directly or tangentially, new sites? It is becoming so common on here, this bossy, prissy scolding. Over by and large minor things.

A quick google tells me Darren Boyle is a freelance journalist- therefore the mistake is his, not MailOnline's.

But if you think you could do court reporting any better you're welcome to sit for six hours in a court every day and navigate all the legal pitfalls yourself.

How have I implied that everything else they write is true?

Why single out this particular inaccuracy then?

It's no more or less embarrassing than the other invented drivel that makes up their content.

@JakeyRolling

A quick google tells me Darren Boyle is a freelance journalist- therefore the mistake is his, not MailOnline's.

But if you think you could do court reporting any better you're welcome to sit for six hours in a court every day and navigate all the legal pitfalls yourself.

Well, if they used his piece without checking it's their mistake too. And court reporting is usually, or used to be, one area where newspapers are especially careful with the facts, due to the many legal pitfalls therein.

And I've done court reporting - It's generally mind-numbing. But the subs were hot on fact checking and sub-editing, they have (or had) to be.
Of course, these days it seems even quality papers think running it through the spell-checker is all that's needed. In fact the quality press is often worse than the red-tops for this.

@midsomermurderess

I do wish people on this site would stop bloody policing other users. Who do you think you are unbraiding others for visiting, either directly or tangentially, new sites? It is becoming so common on here, this bossy, prissy scolding. Over by and large minor things.

I always think they must be sadly lacking in friends to do this.

The average life sentence in the UK ends up being between 15-20 years apparently.
So 4 years, 8 months definitely does not qualify!

@GreenTeaPingPong you linked directly to MailOnline. I don't think that is because you are their paid agent hoping to sneakily drive traffic to them. Somehow I don't think one of the top five most visited news websites in the world needs your help.

I suspect it is because you are a frequent consumer of MailOnline just like millions of others and thought you'd make a dull point.

I'm really glad you've been called out. I am also sick of people who chant "Straw Man! Straw Man!" whenever they've been called even when they don't understand the term. If anyone is making a straw man argument it is you by seeking to deflect from linking and therefore reading MailOnline.

I imagine you thought you'd get many pats on the back for sneering at the Daily Mail on Mumsnet. Usually you would so that must have seemed like a fair bet or shooting fish in a barrel. But not today. Oh well.

Fucking hell it's not that deep limitedperiodonly 🙄
I agree with you OP, it is an embarrassing mistake.

I don't think anyone with one iota of common sense is ever in doubt about the poor standards of journalism in the Daily Mail.

Nearly all bylined staff at MailOnline will be freelance journalists in their 20s on their second job in journalism or possibly even their first.

They will all have degrees and probably a respected qualification from the National Council For The Training Of Journalists (NCTJ) or from City, University of London. These are really tough courses to get on and anyone who thinks otherwise or thinks she could do better is talking out of her arse.

The reason why mistakes frequently appear on MailOnline is because their business model is different to the Daily Mail print edition. They don't have subs and young, inexperienced people with no employment rights are pressured to churn out work for low pay in an aggressive environment. Most right-minded people would say that such a work environment was wrong, wouldn't you agree @GreenTeaPingPong?

That goes for anyone else here who wants to argue with me about the need to support the abuse of employment rights.

For full disclosure: I sometimes work for the Daily Mail. I buy it on Saturdays for the excellent TV guide and frequently look at MailOnline. I don't buy anything from Amazon

@LizBennet

Fucking hell it's not that deep limitedperiodonly 🙄 I agree with you OP, it is an embarrassing mistake.

And that's the difference between you and me.

Probably not that point alone I'd wager.

[quote limitedperiodonly]@GreenTeaPingPong you linked directly to MailOnline. I don't think that is because you are their paid agent hoping to sneakily drive traffic to them. Somehow I don't think one of the top five most visited news websites in the world needs your help.

I suspect it is because you are a frequent consumer of MailOnline just like millions of others and thought you'd make a dull point.

I'm really glad you've been called out. I am also sick of people who chant "Straw Man! Straw Man!" whenever they've been called even when they don't understand the term. If anyone is making a straw man argument it is you by seeking to deflect from linking and therefore reading MailOnline.

I imagine you thought you'd get many pats on the back for sneering at the Daily Mail on Mumsnet. Usually you would so that must have seemed like a fair bet or shooting fish in a barrel. But not today. Oh well.[/quote]
What utter bollocks! How have I been 'called out' exactly? For what misdemeanour? How could I mention a newspaper report without linking to it, that's the usual custom here?

I do understand the meaning of 'straw man' FYI. You argued against something that I had not actually stated. You obviously don't understand the meaning of it. I would link to the definition of straw man on another site but you'd probably tell me off for that too.

Oh I see, my 'crime' is reading the MailOnline. Well duh yes, of course I read it on this occasion, otherwise I wouldn't have been able notice the mistake. Wow, how incredibly perceptive of you.

And yes, I was aware about the low waged journalists and lack of subs used in online versions, which is why I wouldn't be surprised about typos or minor errors.

But you think it's a 'dull point' - feel free to scroll on by next time you see a dull post.

@LizBennet

Probably not that point alone I'd wager.

@LizBennet You said "I'd wager".

I'm sorry but I can't take anyone who says that seriously. I bet they are the sort of pompous arse who says "whilst".

When I've got myself up from rolling on the floor shall we meet at dawn with duelling pistols?

Glad to amuse you, cranky pants 👊🏻

@GreenTeaPingPong I am glad to have helped you admit you look at MailOnline a lot. Don't beat yourself. It's not a crime. I also do things of which I am ashamed.

I'm thrilled to know that you know all about journalism and even what subs are. What do they do, btw? The work of subs goes a bit beyond picking up "typos" and "minor errors".

What job do you do? It seems only fair for you to say so I can talk about it even if I don't know the first thing about it.

Could we also discuss your attitude to employment rights? Mine is very strong no matter who the person works for.

I don't find you dull. I see you as a project. My next challenge is to help you understand the meaning of a straw man argument. You're not there yet but I feel confident that with my help we could reach it.