To think FFS proof read?

[Dhugurrll]

Daily mail...

?

And again...

Journalism and accuracy are not their strong points.

Proofreading went out the window when publications moved online.

YANBU, but then they're not exactly quality news sources anyway

They’re too busy being heated and wearing out the CAPS LOCK to think about anything as trifling as which keys their feckless fingers are stabbing at.

You have no idea the pressure the news desks on ALL papers are under to get things out. They no longer have anyone to proof things because of budget cuts. It isn’t just the Mail.

Things just aren't proof read anymore in those types of environments. A lot of them have to get a certain amount of articles each day, have to source pics and set up the whole article. You'd be surprised the amount of time it takes. It is easy to miss things.

Thaire just simble spaling missdakes!!!

In my country there was a mass-sacking of sub-editors across all the big news agencies about 7 years ago. It was just decided on high that no one cared about SPaG anymore in the reading public.

It took about 8 months for me to start noticing annoying errors (that sub editors would have once caught), and now that the culture of sub editorship has been truly flushed through the ranks the effects are appalling.

The SPaG errors are bad enough, but the ones that get me are the whole sentences that have suffered from ‘cut & paste’ with no re-checking. Or the paragraphs that make no overall sense. And the chronic misinterpretation of statistics. Why would I bother breaching the paywall, if the content of articles is so sloppy?

I’ve mainly switched to radio and podcasts (carefully curated for quality) for my news and editorial analysis. I can cope with all the ‘umming’ and ‘like, you knows’ better than sloppy text.

Not even opening the pics.
Does anyone take the rags seriously any more?

Normal for the DM. The best ones are where a house suddenly increases or decreases by a hundred grand part way through the article.

Oh and the "hilarious moment" that never really is.

That’s a subeditor’s job.

They don’t employ subs any more. Just dozens of illiterate children.

Budget cuts? They aren't government entities with funding, they exist to make a profit they can set whatever budget they like. No need to feel sorry for them.

I don't think people read those kinds of shitty newspapers for their accuracy and intellectual rigour.

@BertieBotts ?! Okay well hope you never get made redundant then?

@Troilusworks it’s all papers and media

Yes I’m sure you’re right but it’s more forgivable if they’re focusing on actual content rather than Kelly Brook’s bikini.

Just my opinion obviously

@BertieBotts actually a fair amount of people in that industry have been made redundant recently, there have been budget cuts.

But that is down to the greed of the company owners, not some random force of nature.

Daily mail jobs are advertised on boxes of cornflakes and Rice Krispies. It's a known fact

There was a recent story where the dm referred to Italy's currency as the Lira . It was a bit
I can't remember the story
But it was about a current event.

No, it's about people not buying papers any more. You still have to have money to pay staff?!

The Daily Mail makes money from advertising dependent on people accessing click bait articles online, not from selling newspapers. So does The Sun and The Mirror. That's why it's a race to the bottom to be more scandalous and why production values are so poor.

They shouldn't really be called newspapers as they're a mixture of political propaganda and gossip.