Standards of internet news - Poorly worded BBC article

r3nu4l

See here

Superfood 'ban' comes into effect

Products claiming to be superfoods will be banned under new EU rules coming into effect on Sunday - unless the claim can be proved.

Blueberries, salmon, spinach and soy have all been hailed as so-called superfoods - foods rich in nutrients.

Some say superfoods can protect against cancer and heart disease, but others say there is no evidence for this...

...The new EU legislation will ban the use of the term superfood unless it is accompanied by a specific authorised health claim that explains to consumers why the product is good for their health...

I'm surprised at the BBC letting this get onto the website. The headline and the first bolded piece of text suggests that these products (spinach, blueberries, salmon etc) will be banned when in fact we see later that (second piece of bolded text) it is the claim and use of the terminology that a product is a 'superfood' that will be banned, not the product itself.

My main point here is that we have recently seen a thread describing a poorly worded poll on the RTÉ website and now this from the BBC, a bastion of standards in the English speaking world.

Is internet news viewed as somehow less important therefore requiring a lower standard of proofing and editorial work or is it the case that there is more pressure on writers and editors to get content uploaded quickly due to the fast paced nature of internet news?

Your thoughts?

J.S. Pill

r3nu4l wrote:

Is internet news viewed as somehow less important therefore requiring a lower standard of proofing and editorial work or is it the case that there is more pressure on writers and editors to get content uploaded quickly due to the fast paced nature of internet news?

Your thoughts?

Makes sense - that article was just sloppy beyond belief though

purplegeko

Thank goodness i'm not the only one. When i saw the headline this morning i immediately thought they were going to ban blueberries, i thought the world's gone mad. It was a really bad piece and it was worded the same on the teletext earlier as well.
I think there is more pressure on internet journalists to prduce articles fast and be the first and as a result the quality of journalism suffers. I have seen this in other pieces on different websites so the Beeb is not the only culprit.

FlutterinBantam

Based on the atrocious grammar and spelling in daily use on this site, I would be surprised if 1% of the people noticed that piece of text.

Milktrolley

Ridiculously bad grammar from NME in their coverage of Live Earth:

Keane are treated fans unable to attend Live Earth yesterday (july 7) with an blog of their day at Wembley Stadium.

I didn't even notice the lower-case 'j' in July the first time round.
Link

Tha Gopher

Speaking of bad headlines, did anyone see the very short article in the Star (i think) on Wednesday re a New Zealand girl who had her face trampled by a horse

"Horse Injury Girl is "Stable"


Horse.....stable....I wasnt sure at first if it was a bad pun