It was a major and very worrying revelation to me when I realized that on the basis of how wrong newspapers always are when they're talking about a subject that you have a lot of knowledge about (be it the Internet, games or The Simpsons)... presumably, that's how wrong they get everything.
From today's Daily Mail article about Jane Fonda: "In the 1980s she made a fortune encouraging women to hone their bodies to perfection with a series of exercise DVDs" Spot the mistake :p
They make these errors all the time. A Leslie Neilson obituary mentioned the "Cigarette?" "Yes, it is" joke as something he invented himself in the 1990s, even though it goes back to Police Squad a decade earlier. And the Everything2 article about Knightmare was filled with errors, it's what gave me the idea to expand the Wikipedia article. Almost makes you want to get a job as a researcher...
I'm not sure if you will want to follow this through, or take my word for it :)
One of the sharpest young researchers in early-modern studies took apart a number of assumptions made by a collection of newspapers (including the Financial Times) about Cromwell and Christmas. I would not bet on him being wrong. He titled the article 'Cromwell Balls', which is annoyingly enticing. :)
One follows the other (follows the other) ((follows the other)). This all reminds me of a 'rule' from research training at Edinburgh (which I've remembered over and above courses done since): "NEVER assume that anybody is as accurate and assiduous as you are". One might presume that journalists hear something similar at some point(?)
Comments 5
Reply
Reply
They make these errors all the time. A Leslie Neilson obituary mentioned the "Cigarette?" "Yes, it is" joke as something he invented himself in the 1990s, even though it goes back to Police Squad a decade earlier. And the Everything2 article about Knightmare was filled with errors, it's what gave me the idea to expand the Wikipedia article. Almost makes you want to get a job as a researcher...
Reply
Reply
One of the sharpest young researchers in early-modern studies took apart a number of assumptions made by a collection of newspapers (including the Financial Times) about Cromwell and Christmas. I would not bet on him being wrong. He titled the article 'Cromwell Balls', which is annoyingly enticing. :)
One follows the other (follows the other) ((follows the other)). This all reminds me of a 'rule' from research training at Edinburgh (which I've remembered over and above courses done since): "NEVER assume that anybody is as accurate and assiduous as you are". One might presume that journalists hear something similar at some point(?)
Reply
Leave a comment