5 ms·
This is an excellent story and pretty fascinating to hear the background of it. If any non-Europeans or football fans don't know what's up, Iceland has the popu
by smcl 10y ago
This is an excellent story and pretty fascinating to hear the background of it. If any non-Europeans or football fans don't know what's up, Iceland has the population of a small city and very little history as a footballing nation, yet they managed to progress into the later stages of the European Championships, knocking out former footballing greats like England (and giving Portugal - the winners of the tournament - a scare) along the way.
Also it's funny to see the Guardian continue to live up to its "Grauniad" nickname once again - the FIRST non-headline sentence has "Iceland travel Euro 2016..." should be "Iceland travel to Euro 2016...". I once for fun kept a tumblr with screenshots of these but it became very boring because:
1. there's usually one glaringly obvious mistake in nearly every single article
2. they never seem to issue corrections, so screenshotting is pointless (this one's over half a year old)
3. they're otherwise a good paper/site, so it feels a bit harsh to point this out (even if it is just for fun)
- scholia 10y ago> This is an excellent story Agreed: I highly recommend it. > there's usually one glaringly obvious mistake in nearly every single article An actual mistake or a typographical error? It compares very favorably to the error rate in Donald Trump tweets! > they never seem to issue corrections, The Guardian is famous for publishing a "Corrections & Clarifications" column [1], and collected clarifications have even been published in book form [2]. However, typographical errors are rarely included, though they do get corrected on the website. > so screenshotting is pointless Yes, screen-shotting is pointless. However, you can email the quoted line(s) and a link to the Guardian global readers' editor at guardian.readers@theguardian.com Hope that helps! [1] https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/series/correctionsandclarifications https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/series/correctionsan... [2] Books https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corrections-Clarifications-2002-Mayes-Ian/dp/1843541734 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corrections-Clarifications-2002-May... https://www.amazon.co.uk/CORRECTIONS-CLARIFICATIONS-Ian-Mayes/dp/1841156035 https://www.amazon.co.uk/CORRECTIONS-CLARIFICATIONS-Ian-Maye... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Only-Correct-Best-Corrections-Clarifications/dp/1843544652 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Only-Correct-Best-Corrections-Clari...
- smcl 10y agoHaha by "screenshotting is pointless" I meant that capturing a funny moment for posterity is pointless since it'll probably be there for years to come. But yes the whole endeavour was pointless when you think about it.
- scholia 10y agoMy apologies for mis-reading you. I have a bee in my bonnet about (PR) people who send me images of things when I have to retype the contents ;-)
- matthewmacleod 10y agothey never seem to issue corrections, so screenshotting is pointless (this one's over half a year old) I don't think that's true! A copy error is quite different from something one would expect to issue a correction for.
- smcl 10y agoI think I used the wrong term, I meant they rarely fix them up afterwards. Some pretty atrocious typos or mess-ups I saw were there for ages. I never reported any but I thought someone at the organisation would read the article after it was published
- ciaranm 10y agoFWIW, the Guardian regularly publishes drafts of articles on it's website, and then makes changes and corrections to the articles. I regularly see Top Photos, Headlines, Captions and even whole paragraphs appear and disappear after a few hours.