Who is correct? The tale of the idiot and the newspaper

[VeryImportantTitle]

I complained to a newspaper outlet about a newsletter I received yesterday which had some errors in my opinion. I wrote to customer services as I was in a cantankerous humour. The newsletter is usually sent out by a particular reporter and I enjoy his style but it was a new reporter yesterday who was filling in for him. no I do not have anything better to be doing

One of the sentences I complained about was this one: A voice from the world of football has thrown his weight behind the Labour leader and accused prime minister Liz Truss of “taking the Mickey” by cutting taxes for the rich.

My complaint was about capitalisation. In my mind, prime minister should have been capitalised and Mickey should not have been. The same newsletter referred to mini-Budget.

I received a very nice reply to my mini-Rant.

To that particular part of the complaint, this was their response: "I agree with you, of course, regarding mickey, but our style is Budget (to distinguish it from the noun or the verb budget, I suppose), and it is therefore also mini-Budget. We also do not capitalise job titles, so we go for prime minister over Prime Minister."

Not to be out-done, I thanked them for their response as I hadn't been expecting one but disagreeing again lol. Shovel and hole comes to mind.

In any case, the person who replied did not have any details included apart from their name. Out of curiosity, I have just googled the name and he is none other than the Managing Editor of this publication. Now I'm thinking VeryImportantTitle - you're a fucking idiot! 😝

I even went so far as to teach this Managing Editor about common nouns and proper nouns! 😁

The exchange was all quite amicable though. I'm not a complete twat.

Please tell me I was correct though? I need to not cringe for the rest of my life.

I can agree with him on prime minister and Budget, but can't see any justification for Mickey!

I would reply in full Op, but am scared that you will also correct me. So I can't be arsed 😂

If you're talking about prime ministers in general it's not capitalised but if you're talking about a specific Prime Minister then it should be capitalised!

I think I've learned my lesson lol

I agree with you and, as a proud pedant, this kind of thing really annoys me.

That said, I’d have mentally filed it under “can’t be bothered”, and would question the well-being of someone who got so wound-up over it that they had to send an email, and then start a thread about it.

Job titles aren’t typically capitalised in news reporting, irrelevant of what the title is.

I agree with you on ‘Mickey’ but I guess the argument could be it’s a name.

Isn't Mickey rhyming slang? As a name it should be capitalised. PM should have capitals in this context.

I think that it's safe to say that I will never get a job with this publication lol. This morning's newsletter was from an entirely different reporter who was also filling in for my favourite reporter. His writing was impeccable pmsl.

There were numerous errors and the capitalisation thing sent me over the edge lol.

They are as it's a title.

I just want the other dude back!

Most of these are questions of house style rather than grammatical absolutes. For my organisation's style guide (which I edited), I've gone for consistency in capitalisation as much as possible. But there are always going to be anomalies - should it be the Government (because it's a shortened form of a proper noun) or the government?

I disagree with their house style in the way they have applied it here because it's not her job title, it's her title. If they'd said 'the prime minister, Liz Truss' there would have been no issue; however 'prime minister Liz Truss in analogous to writing 'ms Truss' or 'president Biden' which is patently ridiculous.

On the question of Budget/budget I do think there's a case for capitalisation as a weak proper name. Bearing in mind that a driving principle of style should be clarity, there is a case for differentiating major fiscal events (Budgets, Autumn Statements, Spending Reviews) through capitalisation.

And I agree with him on Budget and mini-Budget to refer to the government’s Budget to differentiate easily between any old budget.

Oh god, I've missed closing a quote mark and have at least one typo. I remember now why I avoid PC. I can't take the stress.

Job titles aren't typically proper nouns.
It should only be capitalised if it was written as a proper title 'Liz Truss, Prime Minister'.
Same as if you're talking about a government or a prime minister or an editor in a sentence.... lower case.

Thank you!

I feel vindicated, though my tail is still between my legs.

@JassyRadlett actually yes I agree on job titles it is a house style decision that grammatical, I work in Comms, we don’t capitalise job titles.

Oh don't worry. It's a well known phenomenon that when you attempt to correct grammar, you will inevitably fuck up yourself lol.

Sorry OP you’re not going to like this.

You’re correct that if you are talking about a specific prime minister it should be capitalised. But I think since it says “prime minister Liz Truss” it’s fine how it is.

If it said “…accused the Prime Minister of ‘taking the mickey’” without her name then it should be capitalised. But not the way it is, with her name right after. It’s not acting as the proper noun in this context, because her name is the proper noun.

Each publication has its own style guide that outlines the house style, sometimes a booklet or more often a computer file, and sub-editors refer to it to see what the rules are for this sort of thing eg some publications spell out numbers over 10, some hyphenate leg-over etc etc, this is why he said ‘we’. He is referring to the house style. You can still disagree with it but for him, it wasn’t a mistake.

I disagree again!

I'm pretty sure that the man knows his English or he wouldn't be Managing Editor! It's actually news to me that they have a house style in the industry.

I'm still cringing though.