I'm really disappointed in the images in that piece, so low-res you can't read the text. For the BL that's pretty awful. I noticed that the top line of the com

I'm really disappointed in the images in that piece, so low-res you can't read the text. For the BL that's pretty awful. I noticed that the top line of the compared newspaper parts also appears to change, but it's so badly rendered and so small as to be almost unreadable. Why would they do that? Aside, whilst it says "Copyright British Library Board" the content is/should be free-gratis and free-libre reproducible under the Reuse of Public Sector Information Regulations 2015. Really it should have a better imprint, something like "free distribution and reuse allowed under this policy" with a link. Even better would be if they'd adopted a more widely recognised license.