Irish Times Numeracy

Condatis

On page 3 of yesterday's Irish Times – the Paper of Record – a headline proclaims:

"irish Church of Scientology revenues drop by 150%" – the story goes on to say – "... revenues more than halved from €484,070 to €198,509 in 2009.

As a result of this 150% drop ...".

So! As a 100% drop in revenue would of course be zero revenue the literal meaning of the sentence is that revenues were 50% of zero.

In fact the figures quoted indicate a drop in revenue of about 60.02%.

Sloppy writing is bad enough without stupidity. The article was by Gordon Deegan.

Where was the sub-editor?

IRE60

Its 59%!

€484,070-€198,509=-€285,561
(-€285,561/€484,070)(*100)=-59%


Its amazine how any places simply regurgitated that article - The IT have amended the headline in the net now

IRE60

Its 59%!

€484,070-€198,509=-€285,561
(-€285,561/€484,070)(*100)=-59%


Its amazing how any places simply regurgitated that article - The IT have amended the headline in the net now

Condatis

Did the others copy the error?

IRE60

Well in most cases the old headline they quoted was linking to the story, with the new headline!

Snickers Man

Is there such a thing as sub editor any more?

Condatis

Snickers Man wrote: »

Is there such a thing as sub editor any more?

If there are one would wonder about their competence.

On the front page of The Irish Times yesterday (03 August) there was the following headline:

"Nursing home owners accused of theft by residents"

The literal meaning of that is that theft was committed by residents in which the nursing home owners were complicit.

It should have read – Residents accuse nursing home owners of theft.

PS: I am available for editing or sub-editing assignments.

Snickers Man

Wasn't "Never use a passive verb if an active verb will do" one of George Orwell's simple rules for clarity in written English?

I suspect some journalists today wouldn't know what a verb is, active or otherwise.

brian_t

Condatis wrote: »

On the front page of The Irish Times yesterday (03 August) there was the following headline:

"Nursing home owners accused of theft by residents"

Is there not a case to be made for trying to put the principle subject of the article first in the headline regardless of good grammer?

Condatis

Snickers Man wrote: »

Wasn't "Never use a passive verb if an active verb will do" one of George Orwell's simple rules for clarity in written English?

I suspect some journalists today wouldn't know what a verb is, active or otherwise.

That's true – but to juxtapose clauses compounds the offence.

Condatis

brian_t wrote: »

Is there not a case to be made for trying to put the principle subject of the article first in the headline regardless of good grammer?

Grammatical licence may be acceptable in poetry or drama but not in a serious journal.

The famous split infinitive in Star Trek – "to boldly go where no man has gone before" – is acceptable because it projects dramatic impact but it would jar in a different setting.

In the case in question here "Residents" are the subject of the sentence in the active form of the verb while "Nursing home" is the subject of the sentence in the passive form. (Do I have that right BrianT?)

coylemj

Talk about going off topic :eek: The grammar police have taken over the asylum!

Condatis

coylemj wrote: »

Talk about going off topic :eek: The grammar police have taken over the asylum!

Well no actually! The discussion, after all, is about editorial standards.

IRE60

No, its genesis was maths actually that's why Numeracy is in the title!

coylemj

Condatis wrote: »

Well no actually! The discussion, after all, is about editorial standards.

Read the thread title. It's about numbers, not principal and subordinate clauses.

coylemj

brian_t wrote: »

Is there not a case to be made for trying to put the principle subject of the article first in the headline regardless of good grammer?

I think you meant to use the word 'principal' since 'principle' cannot be used in that format as an adjective.

One can take a principled stance about something but 'principle' cannot be used as an adjective.

I know this is a bit hypocritical (going off topic and all that) given my earlier comment but I just couldn't resist.

bill_lehane

Lol! I saw this 150 percent thing mentioned on Twitter also, it made me laugh. The most frequently abused stat in Irish media is percent vs percentage point, as in 'unemployment has dropped by 1 percent from 5 to 4,' which is of course complete bollox!

Otherwise, I have been hearing persistent rumors of cuts at The Irish Times, so my advice would be to pay for it daily if you want it to survive at a high standard.

Condatis

IRE60 wrote: »

No, its genesis was maths actually that's why Numeracy is in the title!

Pedantically my friend if you read the first post you will see that it is about editorial standards which allowed an error in numeracy.

Snickers Man

coylemj wrote: »

Talk about going off topic :eek: The grammar police have taken over the asylum!

Damn right! And we want to see your ampersands!!!

IRE60

Condatis wrote: »

Pedantically my friend if you read the first post you will see that it is about editorial standards which allowed an error in numeracy.

And your headline, written by yourself, was Irish Times Numeracy.

And you are criticising sloppy headlines?

Perhaps you could edit it to reflect your original intention. I suggest Irish "Times editorial standards" then it would cover both the literary and numeric aspects of the article.