Pedantry in the Guardian

[PurpleCarpets]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/01/different-from-is-correct-and-iconic-is-meaningless-what-i-know-after-two-decades-as-a-subeditor

Lost me at "subeditor", but I'll try and unclench and read the rest.

Good lord.
I'm embarrassed for her.
Badly written at best, completely incorrect grammar (and rules) at worst.
She doesn't know the difference between grammar and punctuation. She doesn't know the correct usage of commas. She wouldn't know semantic use if it slapped her on her semi-colon, and she clearly thinks being a prescriptivist makes her use of English better. It doesn't. It shows she's a victim of Dunning-Kruger.

It's not great. And this sentence:

[I]f the sentence needs the (restrictive) clause the word is connecting it to, use “that”, otherwise use “which”.

is almost incomprehensible!

Yep.
She means identifying and non identifying clauses, but clearly doesn't know herself what she means.
Her "rule" is just that "that" is the correct relative pronoun in a defining relative clause.

I didn't notice any actual spelling errors, which I suppose is something for a Guardian column.

@ErrolTheDragon

I didn't notice any actual spelling errors, which I suppose is something for a Guardian column.

True! I was going to add a comment, but saw the comments were full of the "blame it on America!" twaddle we see on here so often, so refrained. The digitalisation of the press has definitely seen a slip in standards. It's almost as if the immediacy of the reading experience has led to writers not giving a toss anymore.