Errors & Omissions: Accuracy can disappear when a headline-writer is pushed for time
Saturday 02 April 2011
A disastrous headline was published on Tuesday. Above a report of poll findings about the Libya campaign appeared these words: "Seven out of 10 want British troops out and fear 'another Iraq'."
The opening paragraph of the story said that respondents to the survey feared that British "armed forces will be sucked into a long Iraq-style military operation in Libya". That was based on the finding that 71 per cent of respondents agreed with the proposition that "I am concerned that the military action in Libya could result in Britain being dragged into a prolonged conflict like the Iraq war".
So far so good, but unfortunately "armed forces" is too long to fit into the headline. But don't worry, there is a familiar headlinese equivalent to hand – troops.
Whoops! This campaign, as far as Britain is concerned, involves only air and naval forces. There are no British troops in Libya (officially at least). The political leadership has been at pains to emphasise that there are no plans to put "boots on the ground". It gets worse. The words "want British troops out" strongly suggest that seven out of 10 respondents are opposed to British involvement in the campaign. That is not true. The survey revealed a much narrower margin of opposition. Presented with the statement "The Government was right to commit British armed forces to action in Libya", 43 per cent agreed and 47 per cent disagreed.
The headline started off trying to give the facts, but got hopelessly jumbled up along the way. That is what can happen when a hurried writer resorts to clichés.
Journalese: Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety, but Cleopatra has been taking a battering in recent days from those eager to say something arresting about the death of Elizabeth Taylor. Here is the opening of a news story published on Wednesday: "It is a fortune that even Cleopatra might have blushed at. Elizabeth Taylor, who immortalised the amorous pharaoh in the lavish 1963 movie of the same name, died leaving behind enough money to buy a pyramid or three of her own."
Now, my dictionary defines "pharaoh" as "an Egyptian king". I suppose you could apply the word to a queen, but it looks very odd. In any case "the amorous pharaoh" gives out the authentic clunk of a descriptive label stuck on a famous person for the benefit of readers from Mars. Thus Einstein is "the cigar-chomping boffin" and Stalin "the moustachioed dictator".
Pharaoh or not, Cleopatra was certainly not "immortalised" by Elizabeth Taylor. Her fame was immortal already. There has never been a time in the past 2,000 years when people did not know about her, and she will be remembered long after Taylor is forgotten. This use of "immortalised" for "portrayed in a film" has become so familiar that people no longer notice how silly it is.
More is less: Hamish McRae wrote in his Wednesday column: "It is hard to underestimate the significance of what is happening in Germany over nuclear power." He meant to say that the significance is very big. People of a pedantic turn would say he should have written that it is hard to overestimate. I would take that view, but the "underestimate" usage is very common. What is the thought process?
Those of us who think a big thing is hard to overestimate are, I think, picturing something like a scale of 1 to 10. It is marked with a bar near the top, at 9 or 9.5. That is the size of the big thing. Obviously, there is less space above the bar than below, so there is less scope to overestimate the quantity than to underestimate it. Ergo, it is hard to overestimate.
Those who think the big thing is hard to underestimate are, I think, taking the word "underestimate" to mean "make light of". So huge is the hugeness of the big thing that the mind cannot possibly make the mistake of thinking it small – that is their thinking.
Perhaps we should just drop this "hard to overestimate/underestimate" thing, since it is so easy to take it either way.
elephant appealThe first 23 lots in our charity auction have now gone. But there are 22 more still up for grabs
newsFormer soldier taped 33 of the animals to the floor and then stamped on them one by one
Michelle Nijhuis' daughter insists (s)he is, and she learnt a valuable lesson on gender in books
Geoffrey Macnab reviews American Hustle, also starring Christian Bale and Bradley Cooper
news Opponents claim it would stop performers such as Beyonce and Madonna appearing on TV
It takes a platoon of chefs, litres of brandy and rum, and almost 100kg of dried fruit
newsThat most ancient of crimes is on the rise, threatening farmers' livelihoods, community trust – and human health
Sun will 'flip upside down' within weeks, says Nasa
Lee Rigby murder: How killers Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale became ultra-violent radicals
Cycle death inquest: Boyfriend hugs driver of 32 tonne tipper truck that killed his girlfriend
Paul Walker death caused by speed alone
Apollo Theatre collapse: Scores injured after ceiling collapses in London's West End
Exclusive: Young people ‘want UK to stay in Europe’: Four in 10 adults aged 18 to 24 are ‘firmly in favour’ of membership, poll shows
Tom Daley ‘is gay because his father died’ says UK evangelist
Iain Duncan Smith leaves Commons food banks debate early
Kiss and yell: Italian protester charged with sexual assault after kissing riot police officer
PM denies two child limit for benefits is part of Tory welfare policy
Anachronistic and iniquitous, grammar schools are a blot on the British education system
- 1 America's 'virgin births'? One in 200 mothers 'became pregnant without having sex'
- 2 North Koreans are gasping for the truth: Let's give it to them
- 3 Sun will 'flip upside down' within weeks, says Nasa
- 4 Christmas comes early: Justin Bieber is 'retiring from music'
- 5 Iain Duncan Smith leaves Commons food banks debate early
- < Previous
- Next >
£38000 - £42000 per annum: Pro-Recruitment Group: A well-renowned London based...
£75000 - £110000 per annum: Pro-Recruitment Group: Economist or Tax profession...
£55000 - £120000 per annum: Pro-Recruitment Group: The Financial Services Tran...
£60000 - £75000 per annum: Pro-Recruitment Group: This leading independent fir...