Times Journalism - spot the mistake

[flaming]

From their series "100 greatest Olympic moments".

"Not many Olympians who finish 15th are applauded by their peers but Danish sailor Paul Elvstrom was Unique. In 1988, aged 60, he competed with his daughter, Trine, in the 49er class at his eighth Games. In the first four he won gold."

Would anyone care to correct the glaring error in the first paragraph of this story?

 

[Twister_Ken]

From their series "100 greatest Olympic moments".

"Not many Olympians who finish 15th are applauded by their peers but Danish sailor Paul Elvstrom was Unique. In 1988, aged 60, he competed with his daughter, Trine, in the 49er class at his eighth Games. In the first four he won gold."

Would anyone care to correct the glaring error in the first paragraph of this story?

1988, 49'er? Don't think so. Tornado cat?

 

[sarabande]

I am sure that even sailors finsihing 15th in an Olympics would have been applauded. So he ain't Unique.

 

[jhr]

If "not many" Olympians finishing 15th (including Paul Elvstrom) were applauded, then he can't have been unique

 

[grumpy_o_g]

I'm not sure why "unique" is capitalised but, as Twister says, it was a Tornado he sailed, not a 49'er,

 

[flaming]

I'm not sure why "unique" is capitalised but, as Twister says, it was a Tornado he sailed, not a 49'er,

Exactly.

I was quite enjoying reading that little series until I saw that. Now I'm just left wondering how much of the stuff I know nothing about was wrong too.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Murdoch paper, innit? You'll note I omitted the word 'news'.

 

[armchairsailor]

What do you expect? Wikipedia was blacked out...

 

[Lakesailor]

You must have found by now that anything that appears in a paper that you have personal knowledge of will be incorrect.
Assume that every article or item has someone, somewhere saying the same thing.
Multiply that by a Daily Mail Factor and where do you end up?

 

[MissFitz]

You must have found by now that anything that appears in a paper that you have personal knowledge of will be incorrect.

More than a grain of truth in that, I fear - as a sub-editor on a national newspaper a decade ago I quickly learned that if you can't be sued for it no one much cares if it's wrong. And given that they now have about one sub per paper, I doubt the situation has improved....

 

[ithet]

Not 1988

And it was in 1984 not '88.

 

[Twister_Ken]

And it was in 1984 not '88.

Nope.

 

[ithet]

Nope.

Sodding Google!

They were together both '84 and '88?

 

[Seajet]

I completely agree with Lakesailor on this; every time a paper - local or national - has commented on a subject I happen to know about, they've either completely distorted the facts or just plain screwed it up !

NB the 'apology, correction' mentions in newspapers, a tiny bit on page 5-12 while the original BS was in huge letters all over the front page...