About me
Archive
About me

Newspaper misspells own name in masthead

close

Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...

This post was published more than 12 years ago

I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.

I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 12 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and write about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.

So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views may well have changed in the last 12 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find utterly cringeworthy today.
  • This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider highly inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.

Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...

Valley News's front-page oopsie.

Valley News's front-page oopsie.

It seems that the New Hampshire-based Valley News managed to misspell its own title on its own masthead on Monday by appending a superfluous ‘s’. Quite impressive stuff and, rather extraordinarily, not spotted by anybody involved in the production process.

No doubt if I owned a newspaper, stuff like that woud be happening all the time. But perhaps that’s not surprising given that I come from the home of the Southport Visiter, consistently misspelled for 164 years, and read theguardian – a paper not best known for its spellchecker, and whose spaceless nonsense masthead has fascinated me since its introduction.

On a more serious note, with editors everywhere laying off subeditors, claiming that they are no longer relevant or necessary in the multimedia newsroom, could there be a more prominent, clear demonstration that the role is still vital?

Without subs, accuracy suffers, whether it be grammatical or factual. And in the ever-more competitive world, where the internet means that CP Scott’s maxim that “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” has never been more true, what do newspapers have on their side, if not accuracy?

This 1,356th post was filed under: Miscellaneous, , , , , .

Recently published posts




Random posts from the archive

Photo-a-day 317: Emirates 777 / 13 November 2012

What I’ve been reading this month / 29 September 2020

Slow news day at the Mail / 25 May 2005

An sjhoward.co.uk Christmas Message / 25 December 2009

“Dear Mr Pa” / 02 September 2005

Michael Crichton: Airframe / 01 March 2005




Comments and responses

Comment from Michael West


    12.06, 11/08/2008

That’s quite a specimen indeed.

But while I appreciate that a lot of arguably literate people confuse a “masthead” with a “nameplate” (or “banner”, or “flag”), the problem is this: If you call the nameplate the “masthead”, then what the hell do you call the masthead?

Please get back to me with an answer.


Comment from kadri azharuddin


    10.52, 28/01/2009

Cool . . . . !

this is a new thing which i came across in a publication where language and spelling plays an important role.

I think this is not a mistake hope this might be a PR strategy which you can say may be a negative PR strategy so that people must know about the product.

Can you reply me that y they have done this or at what percent do you agree with my statement




Compose a new comment

I'm not taking comments on my blog any more, so I'm afraid the opportunity to add to this discussion has passed.


The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.